XIXAX Film Forum

Film Discussion => The Small Screen => Topic started by: modage on July 22, 2010, 09:26:52 AM

Title: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on July 22, 2010, 09:26:52 AM
(http://www.aintitcool.com/images2009/wd40.jpg)

AMC Upcoming Original Series: The Walking Dead

AMC has greenlit The Walking Dead as a six-episode series based on the comic book written by Robert Kirkman and published by Image Comics. The Walking Dead tells the story of life following a zombie apocalypse. It follows a group of survivors, led by police officer Rick Grimes, traveling in search of a safe and secure home. Andrew Lincoln (Love Actually, Teachers, Strike Back) will portray the lead role of Rick Grimes while actor Jon Bernthal (The Pacific, The Ghost Writer) will portray the character Shane, who worked with Rick in the police department before the zombie disaster. Other cast includes Laurie Holden (The Shield), who plays Andrea, one of two sisters who join the survivors of the zombie plague, Steven Yeun as Glenn, an expert scavenger and Sarah Wayne Callies (Prison Break), who plays Rick's wife Lori.

The Walking Dead begins production in June in Atlanta with six, one-hour episodes for season one. The series is set to premiere in October 2010 during AMC Fearfest, the network's annual blockbuster marathon of thriller and horror films. AMC announced development of The Walking Dead in August 2009 and announced the pilot in January of this year.

http://www.amctv.com/originals/The-Walking-Dead/


I'm almost caught up to the comic.  I am really really excited for this.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Fernando on July 22, 2010, 11:21:39 AM
hey mod, what about Rubicon? what have you heard/seen about it?? will it be another good show at amc?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on July 22, 2010, 11:29:33 AM
I'm not really sure!  I saw an early cut of the pilot (twice) but haven't had a chance to watch the final cut they aired after the Breaking Bad finale.  I'm planning on watching it though when it premieres next week.  You can watch it now on AMC TV (http://www.amctv.com/originals/Rubicon/) or download it for free on iTunes (http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewTVSeason?id=376076043&s=143441).
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on July 25, 2010, 03:35:28 PM
Bootleg footage from Comic-Con trailer: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45897
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on August 24, 2010, 11:58:57 AM
AMC’s epic ‘The Walking Dead’ trailer, premiere date
Source: Hollywood Reporter

It's here. This is nearly the same four-minute-plus trailer for "The Walking Dead" that AMC screened for fans at Comic-Con last month.

Since then, I've been a relentless blogger zombie lumbering after AMC reps to bring this to Live Feed readers in its original full-length "The Sun Ain't Gonna Shine Anymore" glory. You can just feel producer-director Frank Darabont's style all over this, and fans of Robert Kirkman's original comic book are optimistic.

Also, some exclusive news -- "The Walking Dead" premiere date, which is pitch perfect.

The show will launch Sunday, October 31st. That's right, Halloween night. And the first episode will be supersized to 90 minutes. The series will premiere during AMC's Fearfest, the network's annual marathon of thriller and horror films. Fearfest is celebrating its 14th year by airing 14 consecutive days of themed programming.

Love zombies? Hate zombies? Don't matter. People are going to be talking about "The Walking Dead" and you need to watch this:

http://livefeed.hollywoodreporter.com/2010/08/the-walking-dead-trailer-video.html
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Pubrick on August 24, 2010, 12:25:45 PM
Love zombies? Hate zombies? Don't matter. People are going to be talking about "The Walking Dead" and you need to watch this:

i think the only reason will be talking about this show is to ask the question: WHY THE FUCK IS THIS ZOMBIE THING STILL GOING???

no one cares about zombies, they are finished. this show seems to prove it by looking like it was shot on a $20 budget. if it makes money and gets a following its because the only ppl still giving a shit about this genre are about as braindead as zombies themselves and there is no shortage of those in the world.

at some point the zombie thing has become a commentary on the indefatigable genre itself. JUST LET IT DIE.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on August 24, 2010, 12:34:23 PM
Nope.  Changing the medium breathes new life into it.  Plus, the focus of the series is really on the characters.  Zombies are a constant threat but it's about survival and how it changes people.  More like The Road than Zombieland. 
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Stefen on August 24, 2010, 12:44:22 PM
It looks great, small budget and all. AMC is doing big things.

The comic series is really really great up until the 40th issue or so. Like Mod said, the series is really more about the people and how they psychologically deal with the situation. The trailer seemed to just highlight what happens in the first 10 pages of the very first issue.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: RegularKarate on August 24, 2010, 01:40:28 PM
AMC is really the only reason I'm into this.  If I had seen that trailer and it weren't a show on AMC, I would probably not care.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Gamblour. on August 24, 2010, 01:55:51 PM
They've been filming this show around here for the past few months, and that actor has been stopping by the coffee shop I work at. He's British, if you remember him in Love Actually, and when I realized he was playing the main character, I wondered if he was listening to my accent. I don't really have one, and I'm sure he wasn't, but he was super nice and thanked me 5x more than the average customer. It made me think he was listening to hear how I said "You're welcome."

Aside from that, I'm amazed how boring this trailer was. Some of the shots look inspired, but overall the direction seems really pedestrian.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 10, 2010, 09:08:03 PM
I just read the whole run of the comic so far, and while Robert Kirkman is a terrible writer of dialogue (there is no subtext; every character says exactly what they mean to communicate at all times), he is a fine plotter, and the story is very bold in its approach to the realism of the situation and in how willing he is to prove the point that no character is safe.  So I'm intrigued.  I'll watch the show.  I'll be curious to see how slavishly they follow the storyline of the comic, or if they'll actually branch out on their own.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on October 10, 2010, 10:14:40 PM
They branch out. I went to the comic-con panel today with Kirkman and Darabont and they both agreed they would always use a better idea if it presented itself and fit within the fabric of the series. And having seen the pilot and a scene from episode 2, they have already made some diversions. 
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 10, 2010, 10:34:06 PM
That's good.  I was afraid the show would lose all impact from my knowing exactly when and how each character dies.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on October 11, 2010, 12:48:00 PM
I really just hate how zombies are a genre.  Night of the Living Dead was a horror film, not a zombie flick.  But then successive knock offs of the idea "Let's do another ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE."  How many fucking times can we glimpse into the future and see how people may or may not survive the end of the world with zombies running around?

For fuck's sake, there is no originality breathed in this.  Let's not kid ourselves that zombie apocalypse is somehow unfamiliar territory.  If you want to consider a new angle on zombie films, let's discuss "I Walked With A Zombie" which incidentally predates all this fucking zombie knock off garbage anyway.

I read the first couple books of Walking Dead, being an avid comic fan and a lot of my friends suggesting "If you like comics, you'll LOVE Walking Dead."  Who the fuck connects those two?  There is little if any redeeming value of this book.  It's a "page turner" in the sense that the conversations themselves are brain dead (PERHAPS TO ILLUSTRATE HOW THE HUMANS THEMSELVES ARE ZOMBIES?  SEE ALSO - ZOMBIELAND, IT'S A REALLY FUNNY MOVIE).  But all in all, the art is fair and nothing inspiring comes about.  It's what you'd expect Image to print, and it doesn't disappoint on that angle.

At this point, it's just as passe to voice an opinion on how dead the zombie genre is.  Because, yeah, it's totally valid to point out that it's xeroxed itself into a wipe of the same script over and over, but at the same time, a shit ton of people still eat it up.  In fact, the very irony that zombies devour brains and in turn produce more zombies is incredibly poignant.

But you simply can't stop fanboys at heart.  Whatever it is that you guys love about zombies, I wish you the very best in this show.  I mean, Frank Darabont isn't horrible and lord knows I would watch this under a variety of other circumstances, but this hype is really like vinegar in my eyes.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 11, 2010, 12:51:53 PM
I don't give a fuck about zombies one way or another, I just liked the books and hope the tv show will be entertaining.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on October 11, 2010, 12:58:32 PM
I really just hate how zombies are a genre.
That's fine, but the fact is there has never been anything like this before on TV.  And yeah, the zombie thing can be worn thin but thats why the drama thing makes up for it.  In a film you have your standard 2 hour arc of trying to figure out what the hell they are and trying to survive etc.  Okay, so lets say that's an episode or two of the show.  Where do you go from there?  Anywhere.  The zombie apocalypse is just a backdrop for a story about these characters trying to survive.

I mean, if you are convincing yourself that you don't want to watch this show, that's fine too.  But I would put some faith in AMC and Frank Darabont that they're going to make some compelling TV.  I've seen the pilot, I thought it was great and I can't believe they're putting it on TV.  Maybe the reason this got a greenlight was because they thought there might be an audience for zombie movies/shows out there but that doesn't diminish the quality of the show.  Let Me In got greenlit because it was about vampires in this awful Twilight/TrueBlood era, but that doesn't make the film worse for it because it found a writer director who really connected with the material.  

Darabont says "What’s innovative about this series is the extended and serialized human drama that’s going on. It’s not so much about the zombies, it’s about the characters - this group of human beings who are trying to survive, and come to terms with what’s happened and with one another."
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on October 11, 2010, 03:12:44 PM
The Making of The Walking Dead (http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid83327935001?bctid=628200502001) 18 min video.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Reelist on October 31, 2010, 09:29:47 PM
this shows pretty tubular
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on October 31, 2010, 11:00:46 PM
Best New Series of 2010.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: cronopio 2 on November 02, 2010, 07:14:29 PM
I don't know about that, but that was a splendid pilot. i'm giddy about the idea of having that atmosphere an hour per week. TV is so good to me... :'(
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on November 02, 2010, 08:15:43 PM
Walrus, did you give this a shot yet?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: picolas on November 02, 2010, 09:22:26 PM
WOW. never before have the zombies themselves been so sympathetic... that zombie missing legs is the best zombie i've ever seen. discounting zombie shakespeare. i love the suggestion that zombies hang onto some little shred of emotional memory eg. the wife. i could practically list everything that happened in the episode and just keep adding 'was so good'... except for that kid with his delivery of '..thankyou.' what a jerk. oh and the cg blood in the shot where the cop kills his old work enemy. pretty much ruined a great shot. nitpicks.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: RegularKarate on November 03, 2010, 02:30:32 PM
Caught this last night.  I really liked it, but I'm a little worried.

What worries me is that they may have shot their wad in the first episode.  This is the only one directed by Darabont and I'm worried the only one that will have this scope.  The CG blood was only a little distracting but if they cut back on the budget even a LITTLE, I could see it being used in excess and ruining a good thing.

The stuff with the mother was brilliant and actually got me a little misty-eyed.  I hope they don't push that sort of thing too hard, but I like the angle.

We'll see though... I'm definitely in for another few episodes.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on November 03, 2010, 02:46:04 PM
I've only seen a few scenes from episode 2 at NY Comic-Con so I really have no idea where it goes from here (besides, well, the comic).  What I saw looked good and consistent with the pilot.  I know a few directors from Breaking Bad are doing a few eps along with Ernest R. Dickerson.  Fingers crossed.

Also: Premiere ratings were higher than Boardwalk Empire and True Blood.  Suck on that HBO.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Pozer on November 07, 2010, 12:48:27 PM
yeah this was pretty great. aMC is pretty great.

with this & dvds for blurays deal youre two fer two in my eyes, modgers.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: squints on November 16, 2010, 02:32:45 AM
So i've seen the first three and i'm pretty hooked.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Reelist on November 16, 2010, 02:54:27 PM
What worries me is that they may have shot their wad in the first episode.  This is the only one directed by Darabont and I'm worried the only one that will have this scope. 

Yeah I'm officially done with this now. Just like when I figured out all of True Blood wasn't being done by Alan Ball, it makes me think they're not really putting everything into it for their creative vision, and instead giving people something different to watch for a few seasons. I'm averse to all the series on AMC actually. Breaking Bad, Mad Men, none of them capture me but critics and old people swear by that shit. It's TV, it's not HBO.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on November 16, 2010, 03:02:50 PM
Nice try.

I will say I've been disappointed in the last 2 episodes, but I'll also say that Reelist is totally wrong.  Darabont wrote ep 2 and co-wrote ep 3.  And Mad Men and Breaking Bad are the best.  Thanks.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on November 16, 2010, 05:31:53 PM
Man this show is slow as hell.  I'm not a huge fan of the comic, the series milks out tension, but sometimes it just drags and drags and drags.

I guess the cop out answer for "budget concerns" could be brought up, but I hate their CGI gore and blood, when they sometimes have amazing makeup, and otherwise cut corners with lame graphics.  Zombie settings are a lot of effects makeup artists' wet dream, just let them play and have it look textured and real for fuck's sake.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: tpfkabi on November 17, 2010, 10:09:16 AM
AMC has done it to me again. I think I have an all out avoidance towards Rubicon after they pulled that Breaking Bad stunt with the times - making it look like the BB episode was longer or something, I can't remember.

I am liking TWD so far.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 22, 2010, 12:02:15 PM
SPOILER ALERT OR WHATEVER

I was just thinking this show was overdue for an extraneous character massacre. There were way too many people in that camp whose names we didn't even know.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: tpfkabi on November 22, 2010, 02:35:45 PM
SPOILER ALERT OR WHATEVER

SPOILER ALERT OR WHATEVER

I was just thinking this show was overdue for an extraneous character massacre. There were way too many people in that camp whose names we didn't even know.



What about the sister/lake scene - at the end you understand the purpose, so does that make it cheap?

Another question - do you think wife/bf affair was pre or only post zombie time?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 22, 2010, 03:12:07 PM
SPOILER ALERT OR WHATEVER

What about the sister/lake scene - at the end you understand the purpose, so does that make it cheap?

I don't really understand the question.  Could you rephrase?


Another question - do you think wife/bf affair was pre or only post zombie time?

It seems fairly evident that it didn't start until after she thought (he told her) that Rick was dead.  Shane knew they were going through a rough patch from his prior talks with Rick, and once the shit hit the fan he was able to take advantage.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: tpfkabi on November 22, 2010, 03:24:13 PM
SPOILER ALERT OR WHATEVER
SPOILER ALERT OR WHATEVER

What about the sister/lake scene - at the end you understand the purpose, so does that make it cheap?

I don't really understand the question.  Could you rephrase?


When I first watched it the long scene between the sisters seemed weird, but my many years of movie/tv watching should have told me something was going to happen to one of them. The idea of writing a scene to give the viewer feelings toward a character in order to make their loss greater. Of course, it could have a big impact on how the living sister handles an upcoming situation. I guess someone is going to have to off the sister in zombie form next episode.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 23, 2010, 07:32:53 AM
I see what you're saying now. I feel like the purpose of the scene was sound, but it wouldn't have stuck out as much if it had been a better written scene. Or better acted. Or at the very least shorter.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: socketlevel on November 23, 2010, 10:00:43 AM
but my many years of movie/tv watching should have told me something was going to happen to one of them. The idea of writing a scene to give the viewer feelings toward a character in order to make their loss greater. Of course, it could have a big impact on how the living sister handles an upcoming situation. I guess someone is going to have to off the sister in zombie form next episode.

i vastly agree with this, however both Mad Men and Breaking Bad have broken this rule, which is refreshing. In both shows there are flashbacks or lonely island scenes of unconnected character development that sometimes don't pay of literally, or if they do pay of directly, it's a little more eye opening. I think in the past this would be considered bad storytelling, that somehow connecting the scenes more to the plot is desired. Over time doing so has become the cliche and thus a slightly more disconnected plot is not only surprising but somehow feels satisfying. Considering both BB and MM are on AMC, I think there was a chance the lake scene could be isolated character development.

Even though while watching i thought the lake scene would pay off with something, i was still surprised with that ending. It's not like what they were talking about had anything to do with the conclusion. It was an emotional set up, that's it; it's not like it ruined plot, which would have sucked.

with that said, the writing of the lake scene and the scene when they arrive with the fish was poorly written and executed from the actors. i really like walking dead so far, but there are moments like this that separate it from the truly great shows in this golden age of television.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 23, 2010, 10:16:25 AM
That's the conundrum of this show; I can't think of a previous instance where I liked a show as much despite so much consistently poor acting and sloppy writing.  The whole badass-gangsters/nursing-home-attendants switcheroo was a prime example.  The show has multi-faceted characters only in the sense that they change on a whim from transparently good to transparently bad and back again.   Subtlety is not on the menu.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on November 23, 2010, 10:34:36 AM
I'll agree with everyone here.  There is so much potential here but the show is just not living up to it.  It's entertaining and there are lots of great elements but definitely some missed opportunities keeping it from being "A" quality (like the pilot).
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Sleepless on November 24, 2010, 07:11:51 AM
I can't think of a previous instance where I liked a show as much despite so much consistently poor acting and sloppy writing.

Er... Lost?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on November 24, 2010, 10:23:29 AM
I can't think of a previous instance where I liked a show as much despite so much consistently poor acting and sloppy writing.

Er... Lost?

Only towards the end!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 24, 2010, 10:27:01 AM
The difference is, you could never use the word "consistent" to describe Lost.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Gold Trumpet on December 01, 2010, 10:21:55 AM
"Walking Dead" Kills Its Writers

By Garth Franklin
Source: Dark Horizons


Despite the renewal for another season, "The Walking Dead" showrunner Frank Darabont has fired the entire writing staff of the AMC hit series reports Deadline.

Along with the scribes, writing executive producer Charles H. Eglee has been let go and Darabont is reportedly looking to assign scripts to freelancers rather than having a writing staff.

Darabont himself penned the first two episodes of the first season and polished the scripts for the other four - one of which came from the comic's creator and two from non-staff writers.

Acclaim for the pilot and second episode ran pretty high, but critical enthusiasm has slightly dropped off in subsequent weeks.

The freelance model is freely used in other countries or international co-productions such as the upcoming BBC/Starz continuation of the "Torchwood" franchise, but on a U.S.-based network series there is a question of unions and potential Writer's Guild infractions.

Darabont also has the issue of a much longer thirteen-episode second season.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on December 01, 2010, 10:28:13 AM
That's going to be a good idea.  Wondering if that includes Robert Kirkman though?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on December 01, 2010, 11:02:17 AM
I'd be okay with that.  His episode was one of the worst offenders.  This last episode was pretty fantastic, though.  It keeps my hopes up.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: socketlevel on December 01, 2010, 03:19:40 PM
I'd be okay with that.  His episode was one of the worst offenders.  This last episode was pretty fantastic, though.  It keeps my hopes up.


***SPOILERS***

you know i did like the last episode, but what's the deal with killing off the best actor in the show. like seriously the guy digging the graves was so fucking good. I know he's not technically killed off but his role and plight is changed if they bring him back.

on a story note, what's the relevance of that character having a premonition/dream if they kill him off? who cares about the amount of holes to dig if they just do that the next episode.  it's not even the type of exposition/character development i mentioned in my previous post. it's motivated in the we-gotta-keep-it-exciting bullshit that shows do, and one way of doing that is by killing off characters. it's a reaction to the fact that characters were never killed off in television for years, but it's an overcompensation if you're building in some kind of precognitive ability in a character.

the episode, while very good, was balanced poorly. I honestly thought the episode was over then there was this tacked on scene involving a scientific/army facility. it should have ended with them driving into the distance, then introduced the facility next episode.

this show should move slower than it has been.

you know it's funny that's the major thing it has going for it, a slow epic zombie Apocalypse but then they randomly change up the scenario while keeping moments slow, it's lacking the focus the first couple episodes had. It should be focused and patient. too many red herrings.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: OrHowILearnedTo on December 01, 2010, 07:41:07 PM
consistently poor acting and sloppy writing.

Yup. Just caught up with this. I'm dedicated to staying with it since I gave up on Breaking Bad after the first season and haven't seen any Mad Men yet and don't wanna miss out on another AMC gem, but I'm not really enjoying this very much at all. Pretty much every character is a cliche and the actors aren't elevating the material at all. Part of this must be the comic (which I haven't read), but alot of the blame has to be put on Darabont. It's been awhile since I've seen Green Mile or Shawshank, but I watched the Majestic and The Mist recently and the dude just doesn't have a knack for naturalistic dialogue or very realistic characters. It's not necessarily a bad thing, he's just better at dramatic/movie dialogue rather than realism, but that is what's bothering me with this show. I just don't really give a fuck about any of the characters.

what's the deal with killing off the best actor in the show. like seriously the guy digging the graves was so fucking good. I know he's not technically killed off but his role and plight is changed if they bring him back.

on a story note, what's the relevance of that character having a premonition/dream if they kill him off? who cares about the amount of holes to dig if they just do that the next episode.  it's not even the type of exposition/character development i mentioned in my previous post. it's motivated in the we-gotta-keep-it-exciting bullshit that shows do, and one way of doing that is by killing off characters. it's a reaction to the fact that characters were never killed off in television for years, but it's an overcompensation if you're building in some kind of precognitive ability in a character.

the episode, while very good, was balanced poorly. I honestly thought the episode was over then there was this tacked on scene involving a scientific/army facility. it should have ended with them driving into the distance, then introduced the facility next episode.

this show should move slower than it has been.

you know it's funny that's the major thing it has going for it, a slow epic zombie Apocalypse but then they randomly change up the scenario while keeping moments slow, it's lacking the focus the first couple episodes had. It should be focused and patient. too many red herrings.

totally agree with this. What was up with that scene where shane and t-dog (seriously?) are about to check out some gas station, then they all go to jim before he dies, then the next scene they're at cdc? so many times there have been instances where the show seems to be re-writing itself on the fly, with scenes that feel totally disconnected from the overall narrative.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on December 01, 2010, 08:09:18 PM
it was probably a discussion at some point whether the characters would just walk up to the CDC and have the door open or whether we would get a little background on whats going on inside first. I'm happy they did it the way they did because it seemed much more foreboding that a man who's obviously yearning for human connection would want survivors to go away.

In a 6 episode season, I can forgive that the episodes feel unbalanced. It's easier to look at the season as a whole when it's so short, so it feels more like a 6 hour miniseries that breaks every hour.  I haven't read the comic but i'm familiar with the story (at least the early parts) so I find the diversions they're taking more annoying than interesting, mostly because a large part of them will have to resolve themselves so as to not affect the overall story. The introduction of the CDC is leading me to believe that the show is going to be taking much more significant turns away from the comic than just adding one handed hicks and fake "gangstas", which is a good thing. I'm willing to bet that since the show is such a runaway success you'll see some improvements in the writing quality next season.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: squints on December 01, 2010, 11:12:28 PM
who here has read the graphic novel and if anyone has, how closely is it following the show so far?


i swear this show gets boring as fuck sometimes. the acting is terrible. the direction is ok. but i love zombies and i love the world the story takes place in (i mean atlanta? really?). It reminds me of Lost. really does. I don't care for Lost but maybe if this show can succeed in that way maybe i'll give Lost a second chance.
I don't like dealing with the lesser boondock saint every episode though.


Everything inside of me says i should just pan this shit and say fuck it. But i'm still intrigued cause its not just a 2 hour movie...there's so much they can do with it. I think my favorite storyline, what i want to see the most, is what happened to that guy and his kid who stayed in the city. Sucks there's only one ep left. How long will we have to wait for S02E01?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on December 05, 2010, 09:57:06 PM
Somebody's special effects team needs to stop over-promising.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on December 06, 2010, 12:29:59 AM
Some slightly intense moments in the finale.  Overall a fairly bland first season.  But I guess it's so successful that if they would've tried more, they would've overextended themselves for no reason.  Enough people are going to love it on principle.  I just hope next season they learn pacing.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: tpfkabi on December 06, 2010, 10:01:05 AM
who here has read the graphic novel and if anyone has, how closely is it following the show so far?

I'm wondering this, too. Did this season = one comic? It felt unfulfilling as a movie cut in half, but I don't know that you can payoff the zombie type situation without totally ending the series - if that makes sense. I guess we will have to wait a year or so to see more.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on December 06, 2010, 10:35:06 AM
The pilot was pretty close to the comics but everything else after that has been pretty much completely invented.  There is no Merle, they don't go to CDC, etc. etc.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on December 06, 2010, 10:51:04 AM
The pilot was pretty close to the comics but everything else after that has been pretty much completely invented.  There is no Merle, they don't go to CDC, etc. etc.

Then I'm glad the writer who thought up the "homies" has been fired.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: socketlevel on December 06, 2010, 10:54:38 AM
who here has read the graphic novel and if anyone has, how closely is it following the show so far?

I'm wondering this, too. Did this season = one comic? It felt unfulfilling as a movie cut in half, but I don't know that you can payoff the zombie type situation without totally ending the series - if that makes sense. I guess we will have to wait a year or so to see more.

It's like 40% following it, i could get specific if you want. basically the first 5 episodes somewhat follows what happens in the first book of the series. the last 1/4 of the 5th and entire 6th episode is a complete deviation. keep in mind these are TPBs and much longer than a regular comic.  the show doesn't do many things that the book does, and vice versa. some characters die in the book that are still alive in the show. the book also introduces many more characters... it seems to be more of a cannon fodder thing for zombies.

but ya let me know if you want me to expand on that, however i don't wanna ruin the book for anyone who decides to pick it up.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on December 06, 2010, 11:04:02 AM
The pilot was pretty close to the comics but everything else after that has been pretty much completely invented.  There is no Merle, they don't go to CDC, etc. etc.

Then I'm glad the writer who thought up the "homies" has been fired.

Surprisingly, the writer of that episode was Robert Kirkman, the writer of the comic.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on December 06, 2010, 11:25:24 AM
It's weird cause there is a lot of good stuff in the book, like at least as good as whats in the show, but probably better.  All the deviations in the pilot were actually improvements or not noticeable, but the rest of them seem fairly arbitrary.  Like they're blazing some new trail without necessarily making anything better.  It's weird.  Also: too many characters, all underdeveloped.  This show needs LOST's writers to flesh out their characters. 
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: RegularKarate on December 06, 2010, 12:31:43 PM
I watched the finale in a theater last night and because of my desire to see it this way, I had to watch the last 4 episodes in one day.

Overall, this show is sub-par for AMC, but still enjoyable. 

Some of the writing gets bogged down in comic-bookism.  The shitty gangsters scene is such an example of comic-book style dialog where cliches are used to get across a character-type in as few panels as possible.  Because of this, when an actor sucks, it REALLY shows.

It also doesn't seem to be able to decide if it wants to cater to zombie fans or character-based-drama fans.  There are too many "bad-ass" moments that are pandering to zombie bullshit that jerks like.  I also hate the sound design... the loud, mushy, gross noises is just WAY too unrealistic and jarring.  It's also childish.

I'm still in enough to watch the next season (in ten months) especially considering the new writers will be coming on.  I just hope it's more pilot and less everything else.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on December 06, 2010, 12:53:18 PM
Don't get your hopes up....

THE WALKING DEAD Producer Denies Mass Firing (http://twitchfilm.com/news/2010/12/the-walking-dead-producer-denies-mass-firing.php)
via: Twitch

Last week Deadline reported that Frank Darabont had fired the entire writing staff of hit show The Walking Dead and planned to forgo a writing staff entirely for season two, hiring on freelancers when outside help was needed. Not so, says series producer Gale Anne Hurd in an interview with Entertainment Weekly. (http://insidetv.ew.com/2010/12/03/walking-dead-darabont-hurd-writers/)

According to Hurd head writer Charles Eglee is departing of his own accord to pursue his own projects. And she also says that various other writers have projects that they are pitching which will take priority should they be picked up for pilot or series. But that's all standard behavior in the television world. Who wouldn't want to have their own show on the air rather than being a hired gun on someone else's? The idea that Darabont has fired the lot she flat out denies.

Deadline is normally pretty reliable but this also wouldn't be the first time that someone had planted a story there to try and make someone look bad. So judge for yourself. Did Deadline have it right, in which case Hurd is performing a spin job now? Or was the whole thing a widely spread mistake?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: tpfkabi on December 06, 2010, 03:07:33 PM
I also hate the sound design... the loud, mushy, gross noises is just WAY too unrealistic and jarring.  It's also childish.

This stood out to me, too, though I listen to it via crappy TV speakers.

Oh yeah, Merle...they really left that one hanging.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on December 06, 2010, 04:01:16 PM
Yeah, it's awful how sloppy it's gotten, especially with loose ends not tied or even addressed at the conclusion of this season.

I remained hopeful, though with flagging enthusiasm, throughout the show simply because it was a unique concept for television, and I so wished for a return to pilot form. This particular finale was awful. The acting in scenes meant to elicit a response gave me nothing, except "man I hate that guy's acting," and only a superficial sympathy for other characters I'm told I'm supposed to care for.

And then my girlfriend made a funny comment, wondering if the show will move on to another group of survivors. I haven't read the comic (though I believe they stick with the same group), so I don't know for sure, but I immediately turned to her and said, "that would be much more interesting."
I really like this idea, and I think it's one that would work for this show. Each season follows a different group of survivors and how they've come to terms with the apocalypse, especially now that it's been revealed the virus has gone global. It would keep things fresh, and if we tire of the characters but still remain enthralled by the concept, we wouldn't have to dread the subsequent seasons.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on July 22, 2011, 06:20:42 PM
2011 Comic-Con: 'The Walking Dead' Unveils Season 2 Premiere Date, New Trailer, More
BY NELLIE ANDREEVA | Deadline

UPDATED: The second season of AMC's The Walking Dead will premiere on Oct. 16, the network announced at the top of the panel for the hit zombie drama at Comic-Con today. Once again, the premiere will coincide with AMC's popular marathon of thriller and horror films. At the panel, the network also unveiled a first-look, five-minute trailer for the 13-episode Season 2 of The Walking Dead (video below). During the Q&A session, Walking Dead writer-executive producer Darabont said that Season 2 “picks up about five seconds in an overlap with the first season’s finale —so none of this bullsh-t ‘six months later’ stuff,” according to our sister site TVLine, which covered the panel. Darabont also said that he had no problem finding new writers after most of the writing stuff from the first season was let go. "No, we’ve got people coming to the table going, ‘Wow, we love this and we want to be a part of it,’ and that’s a really cool thing,” he said. Asked about his dream casting on the show, executive producer Robert Kirkman, on whose comic the series is based, chanted, “Ed O’Neill, Ed O’Neill, and Ed O’Neill.” If he is too busy with his hit comedy Modern Family, “My second go-to is John Stamos.”



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJhJrOT1inA
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on August 12, 2011, 03:32:12 PM
'Walking Dead': AMC Execs Fly to Set, Fired Showrunner Frank Darabont Shops New Series (Exclusive)
Source: THR

AMC president Charlie Collier and head of original programming Joel Stillerman on Thursday flew to Atlanta for a one-day visit to the production offices of The Walking Dead, where they met with a cast and crew roiled by the abrupt firing of showrunner Frank Darabont.

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, a source says Darabont is shopping an hour-long drama series that would mark his return to television. The unspecified project has attracted interest from more than one bidder.

Sources say the Walking Dead cast and crew have been unhappy since late July, when they were summoned to a lunch meeting with AMC vp scripted programming Ben Davis, who confirmed that Darabont was out. A source says some on the production of the hit zombie drama had been asking that Collier or another high-level AMC executive "go and own up to this, and they delayed for the last week." The network confirms to The Hollywood Reporter that Collier and Stillerman were on set on Thursday and returned to their New York offices the same day.

As reported by THR, many of those working on AMC's highest-rated show were dismayed after Darabont was dismissed following a July 22 promotional appearance at Comic-Con. One insider said the cast and crew were stunned "at the duplicity of AMC" for using Darabont to promote the show just before firing him.

There had been a significant cut in the per-episode budget imposed on the show's second season before it premiered last Halloween. Darabont's hopes that AMC would reconsider the depth of those cuts in light of the show's success were eventually dashed. There was also said to be tension between Darabont and Stillerman over AMC's cost-saving suggestions, including shooting more scenes indoors.

Since Darabont was fired, there has been chatter on the set about the cast and crew possibly staging a work stoppage in protest. The agencies representing the show's creative talent have urged them not to walk out, and no work stoppage has occurred.

The nature of Collier and Stillerman’s interaction with the cast and crew is not known, nor is the involvement of Glen Mazzara, who took over as showrunner for Darabont.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 19, 2011, 04:25:13 AM
I don't know if anyone bothered to watch after the mediocrity that was most of the first season, but the season two premiere was pretty badass. It felt like the show that the pilot promised it would be, but hadn't delivered until now.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 72teeth on October 22, 2011, 08:35:57 PM
Ahhhhg! I still have yet to see this, soley because i havent had the time to actually sit in the right atmosphere and watch... ive got monday off... ill be back on monday
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Neil on October 23, 2011, 09:41:47 PM
I'm fully onboard for this show.  I thought the first season, though it has some problems, is a fantastic ride. 

Spoils

I'm not super concerned with the loose ends. It just feels like they are building up plot lines to me.

I haven't had repeat viewings of the episodes yet, so i don't really have anything to say about whether or not the show is good in repeat viewings, but I think it is a fantastic show.


RK, I was curious what was childish about it?

I like that the word 'zombie' has yet to come up. But I'm sure someone considers this obvious though.  I feel like this catches flack simply because the zombie criteria is not to be fucked with. In other words people view it under a zombi-fied lens. I can't really articulate that thought fully, but oh well.

There are parts that deal with leadership and keeping one's humanity which parallels lost IMO, and i enjoy those aspects, but i guess that is just a common theme within stuff like lord of the flies or castaway and other  situations involving the return to the state of nature and trying to rebuild a community.

I'm fully caught up, and i really loved the first 2 episodes of season 2.  I was about to explode with tears on several occasions and that shit with the mob on the interstate felt like it went on for 30 minutes. Find myself getting up from the couch to pace my living room, but instantly sit back down. Shit has me on edge.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 24, 2011, 10:29:31 PM
Nice little AMC crossover in this last episode: when Daryl pulls out his brother's drug stash, there's a big pile of blue meth at the bottom of the bag.

(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d179/polkablues/walking-dead-meth.jpg)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on November 02, 2011, 11:39:31 PM
Nice little AMC crossover in this last episode: when Daryl pulls out his brother's drug stash, there's a big pile of blue meth at the bottom of the bag.

(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d179/polkablues/walking-dead-meth.jpg)

hahahah, classic!

I wish I liked this show better, though....
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 06, 2011, 01:42:59 AM
I just finished the first season, then watched the first episode of Season 2. I feel like everyone should just pretend this is Season 1 and we're starting over... it's so much better now, as Polka said.

I pretty much hated everything after the pilot and deeply resented the aggressive emotional manipulation that seemed to get more transparent and unintentionally funny with each episode. And yet, I kept watching, because the season was short, and because of the show's potential. Pretty much like this:

That's the conundrum of this show; I can't think of a previous instance where I liked a show as much despite so much consistently poor acting and sloppy writing.

The problem is that I'm going to have trouble getting into these characters after they've been massacred by the writing in the first season. Some of them are good, but some of them are cartoons. How does a show successfully rewrite its characters?

Also, Andrew Lincoln's acting continues to be a problem. A major problem. A very major problem. Is that not the most inept southern accent ever? I could tell when he uttered his first syllable. His wife's accent is also unconvincing, but at least she's a decent actor (crazy eyes aside).
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 06, 2011, 05:29:42 PM
The wife's crazy eyes in the opening credits continue to be the scariest thing about this show.  I agree there's something exciting about the whole thing, even though the more I think about the show the more problems I have with it. The major problem seems to be the lack of good characters.  Zombie movies are filled to the brim with selfish ass holes we can't wait to see get killed, only in this show they hang around for seasons at a time.

The new season has been a vast improvement so far.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 06, 2011, 11:09:00 PM
Just had an epiphany. Two of the main characters in this show look very similar to the main characters in Bones (not that I've watched more than one episode of that trash). See below. Not even sure I need to name them.

(http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/BonesPic.jpg)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on November 07, 2011, 08:21:49 PM
after careful consideration, I really cannot stand 90% of this show.

Most of the characters and dialogue are flat and they act illogically.  Certain actors can bring their role to life and make them more likable, like Jeffery DeMunn.  Overall the cast seems to have little chemistry onscreen.  It seems as if the writers want something to happen so they just put it in the script and don't think about why their characters would do this stuff.  It's like watching 14-year olds put on a play.
I never feel like any punches are going to be pulled on the show, and when they are, it's not often earned.  Points are repeated by characters as if we had forgotten them from earlier in the episode.

The cinematography is very good and there is always great suspense in every Zombie Attack scene.  There are some good shock moments.
But now I'm just watching the show to see if I'll ever embrace it, or even like it.  It's like when I was in 5th Grade and watching "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers" and just laughing at how bad it was, HOPING that Saban & Co. would somehow figure out how to make it more than just product.

Defend if you must.  I'm kind of done with thinking the show's gonna be worth my time.  Maybe we're just spoiled by "Breaking Bad" and "Mad Men" and other AMC shows with alliterated titles.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 07, 2011, 08:35:48 PM
^ Totally agree with all of that. I was actually going to single out Jeffrey DeMunn as the best actor on the show (by quite a wide margin, actually) and as a result, his character is probably the best character.

I'm not totally caught up, so maybe this has changed... but I was really annoyed that they sort of abruptly dropped the duo thing that was developing between Rick and Glenn. Those two did have good chemistry. And Glenn could be a great character, by the way, but they've just left him sitting there doing nothing since... well, seems like forever.

And yet, I'm still watching the show. Like you said, it still has some great suspense scenes. And I'm a sucker for hyper-serialization.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 08, 2011, 02:58:15 AM
I watched S2/E2. Just when I thought they had something going again, they defaulted back to crass emotional manipulation. It was the centerpiece of this episode. Also, more clumsy, transparent "character building" with Rick, in the way that his irrepressible honor and bravery almost cause him to go out and endanger his own life. And yes, writers, I understand that Rick and his son's situations are now reversed, and I understand that it's ironic, presumably in a tear-jerky sort of way. Trust me, I get it. I really do. Thanks for ramming that down my throat three or four times this episode, including simply putting it in dialogue (why not?) and dedicating an entire prologue to it (of course). They're still trying to develop characters like this, and it's totally working against them. Will this spiral of failure ever end?

My advice? Stop trying with the characters. You've already failed. You're just making it worse. Have fun with the zombies and the suspense. Why can't this show be fun?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Pubrick on November 09, 2011, 12:38:44 AM
my advice? stop watching it.

thanks for taking the bullet though guys, another bunch of hours of my life that i can devote to something less pointless.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 14, 2011, 01:55:16 AM
The last 3 episodes have been very good. Surprisingly good. Mostly because they decided to follow my advice and give Glenn and Darryl more to do. Those two are officially the best characters. Darryl is especially interesting, and the acting certainly helps. They also gave Shane some serious dimension (as forced as it may have been), and as a result he no longer annoys me. The cold opens have been remarkably good. I like where this is going.

The emotional manipulation is still there, but now it's sort of poking you with a stick rather than crushing your skull with a baseball bat.

There's the fact that the show appears to be good to the extent that it excludes Rick (the ostensible lead), but let's not think about that right now.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: tpfkabi on November 14, 2011, 06:04:59 PM
I'm glad Lauren Cohan is on there. I happened to catch an episode of Supernatural when she was on and I actually kept watching. I have only seen her in supporting roles, so I can't say much about her acting, but she is easy on the eyes imo.

So was the flashback scene in the last episode filmed a long time ago since Shane had hair, or can they make wigs look that realistic? That had to be planned pretty far in advance I would think.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 16, 2011, 11:30:06 AM
It looked like they were using the same set as the Zombie herd scene from the premiere, so I'm not surprised if it was filmed earlier. That scene could have been placed in any episode.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: squints on November 16, 2011, 01:28:45 PM
When the best character in your show is a Boondock Saint, you know you've got a problem.


SPOILS

Norman Reedus is really the only reason I've been into the last few episodes and when he got shot in the head in this one i was kind of upset that that's how he was going to go out but also like "FUCK YEAH THIS SHOW FINALLY GREW SOME BALLS."

But of course, herp derp, its just a flesh wound, he'll be alright......fucking pussies.

GT put this on his fb wall the other day, I feel its fitting:

"The Walking Dead's a show about heroic zombies trying to stop self-indulgent humans from having an annoying soap opera."
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Neil on November 16, 2011, 02:51:16 PM
Spoils

I'm not trying to debate whether or not this show has melodramatic elements, but doesn't it seem a bit odd to call the actions in a zombie apocalypse over dramatic?  Despite the fact that I don't agree with most of their actions and ways they go about things, it's important to understand that fear doesn't exactly breed rational thought.  So, I just don't really think that approach does much.

Again, let me reiterate, I tend to agree with most of everyone's opinions about certain negative aspects of the show but that doesn't change the fact that I enjoy it.  GT's fb post is funny though.

The pregnancy bit is typical soap opera bullshit, but mad men is basically the same thing.  Stylized soap opera.   Someone has someone's baby but they don't know that they're not the father blah blah blah.

I believe that this doesn't excuse these shows from scrutiny, but I find a show like walking dead worth watching in comparison to the rest of television drama.  I don't really feel like any of the complaints have made it unwatchable for me personally.

It's been clear since ep 1 that the show doesn't have the "balls" that the graphic novel does, but I still find it entertaining.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Tictacbk on November 16, 2011, 04:36:28 PM
I think a lot of the disappointment with this show comes from the frustration that it COULD be so much better, but its not.  Instead its often boring, and filled with plot devices that are there just to fill the gaps between zombie attacks.  I mean, we're 5 episodes in and what the hell has happened?  At most 2 episodes worth of actual content.  Its to the point where any small moments of character development feel so refreshing.

In order to enjoy the show you have to appropriately lower your expectations...just like most Zombie related things.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 16, 2011, 05:35:46 PM
I mean, we're 5 episodes in and what the hell has happened?  At most 2 episodes worth of actual content.  Its to the point where any small moments of character development feel so refreshing.

That's exactly right. The show is trying to be Lost, but it doesn't earn its slow pace.

In order to enjoy the show you have to appropriately lower your expectations...

Yup... that's what I'm doing.

GT put this on his fb wall the other day, I feel its fitting:

"The Walking Dead's a show about heroic zombies trying to stop self-indulgent humans from having an annoying soap opera."

That is a flawless and all-encompassing description of this show... I love GT sometimes.

I'm not trying to debate whether or not this show has melodramatic elements, but doesn't it seem a bit odd to call the actions in a zombie apocalypse over dramatic?  Despite the fact that I don't agree with most of their actions and ways they go about things, it's important to understand that fear doesn't exactly breed rational thought.  So, I just don't really think that approach does much.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of melodrama (and even possibly soap opera). I'm only opposed to this show's aggressive (and humorously direct) emotional manipulation of the audience. See my previous "crushing your skull with a baseball bat" analogy. You know it's bad when a scene basically screams at you (for example) Hey, look! This scene is about how Rick is so heroic that he would foolishly/needlessly risk his own life! Watch him struggle with his boundless heroism! Actually, don't just watch, we're going to also explain it to you through dialogue. It's gotten much better with the last few episodes, but if they pick up that baseball bat again, I will be very disappointed (and probably not surprised).

SPOILS

Norman Reedus is really the only reason I've been into the last few episodes and when he got shot in the head in this one i was kind of upset that that's how he was going to go out but also like "FUCK YEAH THIS SHOW FINALLY GREW SOME BALLS."

But of course, herp derp, its just a flesh wound, he'll be alright......fucking pussies.

Yeah, that was quite silly, but so is the entire show, so that little OMG did she kill him? gimmick barely even registered.

The pregnancy also barely registered. I'm not sure that I care. Just figure out whose baby it is, proceed with the inevitable *almost dies during childbirth* scene, and move on.

Although... childbirth + zombies would make for a spectacular scene.

Also, I would like to see zombie baby.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: squints on November 16, 2011, 05:46:16 PM
Also, I would like to see zombie baby.

Its been done twice, once in Dead Alive to comedic effect, and once in the remake of Dawn of the Dead to really disturbing effect.

One thing i did like about the last episode was the flashback to the highway scene, that was fantastic. My favorite parts of Apocalyptic movies and shows are the scenes of the actual apocalypse  happening, and we got a little taste there. More of that please.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 16, 2011, 06:05:11 PM
I just realized something.

Considering the pacing, Lori is going to spend the rest of the show pregnant.

(SPOILER)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 16, 2011, 07:45:56 PM
Either that or we'll get the inevitable "1 year later" cut. 

Seriously though, these people need to start dying already.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 16, 2011, 08:33:14 PM
Rick. Especially Rick.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 16, 2011, 10:44:02 PM
COMICS SPOILER:

Rather than killing Rick off, they need to do what they did in the comics and kill off Laurie and their baby. Dodgy accent aside, I really like Andrew Lincoln in the role, and he needs that kick in the balls to force his character into some interesting places.

The best aspect of the comics is that it really does feel like any character could die at any moment, and the show has no sense of that. We're, what, five episodes into this season, and one character has died. A character who was around for two episodes. The stakes in the comic are huge, imminent, and permanent. On the show, there seemingly are no stakes beyond "Will Glenn get laid a second time?"

The show's still compulsively watchable for me, but I really wish they would consult me on some of these decisions.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 16, 2011, 11:48:37 PM
COMICS SPOILER...

Well then. That would be interesting. If Lori gets bitten, does her baby become a zombie fetus? Would they zombify simultaneously? If that's the case, would the zombie fetus be content staying inside a zombie womb, or would it want to get out?

This must happen.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 17, 2011, 01:14:23 AM
CONTINUED COMICS SPOILER

In the comics it happened after the baby was born (and they died from a gunshot, not zombification), but I'm totally up for a zombie fetus.  It could be like a little Kuato poking out of zombie Lori's stomach.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Fernando on November 17, 2011, 12:30:39 PM
wouldn't a zombie fetus eat the insides of her mom?

maybe I'm in the minority but 1st season was better (so far), the flashbacks are good thou and have a lot of potential, they should do whole episodes of them, the rest is kind of meh.


as far as the shows I'm seeing right now, the only one worth it is Homeland* and to some extent Boardwalk, or maybe they seem good because the rest is mediocre/bad, one thing's for sure, br ba really spoiled me (us).

* if you have time check it out, id recommend to give it a shot.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 17, 2011, 12:35:23 PM
EVEN MORE COMICS SPOILERS

They seem to be deviating from the comics quite a bit as far as who lives and dies (Shane being alive, Otis being dead) but they seem to be keeping the basic story beats (Hershel's farm). So far I've liked the deviations, especially what they've done with Shane this season. If they kill off Laurie and the Baby I'd be more satisfied with the show (that came out wrong). I'm just hoping the prison/governor storyline remains in there, that would make a great 3rd season.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 17, 2011, 12:36:15 PM
as far as the shows I'm seeing right now, the only one worth it is Homeland*

That is a great great show, and probably should have it's own thread here.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on November 20, 2011, 09:40:16 PM
I'm gonna give it up for this week's episode, "Secrets".  As lame a title as it was, it had the best acting and let all that tension the season has had boil up to the forefront.  Finally people get to show some acting chops instead of "forced intensity" which is what most of the show has been lately.

I still hate that the guy who plays Herschel doesn't ever move his eyebrows and that they're dragging out the Sophia plot almost as long as "Waaaaaalt!", but then they knew Walt wasn't getting eaten and Sophia could definitely be (walking?) dead.  FINALLY this show didn't suck for the most part since the first couple episodes.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 21, 2011, 02:54:17 AM
Yeah, this was possibly the best episode yet. Gone are the forced, drawn-out, unintentionally funny emotional manipulations. In their place are genuinely good character moments. It's something the show has never done before. I never believed it would actually work.

I was particularly shocked to see Rick have good character moments. Well done.

A few minor complaints I guess...

- What the crap? The morning after pill is not an abortion pill. Once you're pregnant, especially THAT pregnant, it's not going to do anything. The pills contain hormones, not magical baby poison. (Just looked it up, and the largest window you could possibly hope for with the morning after pill is up to 5 days after the event.) This is sort of acknowledged within the show (Glenn asks doubtfully if they're actually going to work), however every moment after that treats this as an actual dramatic device, as if it matters whether she takes or doesn't take the pills, or vomits them up or whatever. It's not going to make any difference. She is pregnant.

- Maggie's emotions throughout the episode were a bit cartoonish. It's funny that it had to happen when everyone else improved their acting.

- Dale was uncharacteristically aggressive. Maybe that's his thing now. It does make sense that he's reached that point, having learned at least 3 unsettling things this episode. That's fine, and I kind of like it, but my complaint is his confrontation with Shane. He just seemed too specific, especially with his insinuations about Otis. And he said that Shane had been vague about Otis, which isn't true at all. (Shane told his conveniently adjusted story in full logistical detail at the funeral.)

- When Rick said to Lori "you thought I was dead, right?" why did she take so long to confirm?

- Yeah, at this point, I honestly hope Sophia is zombified and they have to take her out as she enters the camp. Even better, she wanders in under the cover of night and Hershel corrals her into the barn.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 21, 2011, 11:25:32 AM
I too was shaking my head at the morning after pill scenario. Do they really think people are that stupid? I guess it's an easier story to pull off than Lori convincing Dale to do the coat hanger thing...
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 21, 2011, 11:51:38 AM
Actually, I bet Hershel performed his share of abortions back in the day.

And then he reformed. "Life begins at zombification!"
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 21, 2011, 08:07:09 PM
I too was shaking my head at the morning after pill scenario. Do they really think people are that stupid? I guess it's an easier story to pull off than Lori convincing Dale to do the coat hanger thing...

If anything, this show has made it entirely plausible that Lori, Rick, Glenn, and Maggie are all clueless and misinformed about how morning-after pills work.  And realistically, they're all from small towns in the South; I live in a major, highly-liberal city, and I know COLLEGE GRADUATES who believe that morning-after pills are the same as an abortion.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 21, 2011, 08:15:28 PM
Yeah, except the episode treated it as an actual dramatic device with an uncertain outcome.

Also in that final scene between Rick and Lori, I think our takeaway is supposed to be "hmm well obviously she does still want the baby because she vomited up the pills," not "lawl they're both stupid, it doesn't matter, and she just vomited for no reason."
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 21, 2011, 09:16:13 PM
A good point.  And the fact is, there actually is a prescription drug called mifepristone that will terminate a pregnancy after the egg has implanted in the uterus.  That the writers used the morning-after pill instead does suggest that they themselves didn't know the difference.  And that it could make it through the writers, producers, director, and actors without a single person stopping them and saying "that's not how that works" is kind of depressing.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 22, 2011, 12:25:41 AM
And I somehow recall complaining about Breaking Bad plot holes...
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: analogzombie on November 22, 2011, 08:42:09 PM
I enjoyed this episode more than the last but, the fact that the budget was slashed is really starting to show and I am SO tired of the Lori/Shane/Rick drama. The great thing about the graphic novels was that no one was safe. It's becoming clear that the central cast is zombie-proof.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 28, 2011, 01:26:33 AM
Wow. Best episode yet. This show is officially good now. Talk about realizing its potential... this certainly did that. More of this, please.

Also, totally called it.

SPOILER

I honestly hope Sophia is zombified and they have to take her out as she enters the camp. Even better, she wanders in under the cover of night and Hershel corrals her into the barn.

Did this happen in the comics, too?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: cine on November 28, 2011, 02:12:01 PM
The great thing about the graphic novels was that no one was safe. It's becoming clear that the central cast is zombie-proof.

or that the show is only 13 episodes in and they have no reason to shoot their wad right away??

i think the daughter getting killed is proof enough that nobody is safe.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 28, 2011, 03:15:48 PM
i think the daughter getting killed is proof enough that nobody is safe.

Well, she wasn't really part of the central cast, but I guess that doesn't matter. She represented something very powerful, and the way that was destroyed was nearly perfect, and probably more powerful that one of the central cast members getting picked off (which still does need to happen).
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on November 28, 2011, 08:35:29 PM
Wow. Best episode yet. This show is officially good now. Talk about realizing its potential... this certainly did that. More of this, please.

Yeah, it hit all the emotional notes I hope to see on this show and gave us some Walker violence

My pulse was pounding at some points watching it first thing this morning, and this is pre-coffee, and I actually found myself choking up at the end in spite of my perspective on the show

You know, when we talk about the lack of "safeness" that this show requires, I have a sense that people were expecting this more consistently back when Frank Darabont was involved.  The Mist was the most despondent genre film I've seen in modern times.  (My dad said it was "made by sick people", and when he uses that term to express his distaste, this usually is a stamp of approval for me).
Well, I'm glad things are going in the direction they are going now.  It's a ZOMBIE show, for cryin' out loud.

Now let's just get off that damn farm!  It was well worth any build-up for this one here.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: tpfkabi on November 28, 2011, 10:24:05 PM
I just watch it unable to form the strong good/bad episode opinions, but the Daryl/saddle scene was painful (as in not good).
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 28, 2011, 11:04:39 PM
I just watch it unable to form the strong good/bad episode opinions, but the Daryl/saddle scene was painful (as in not good).

Yeah that was very bizarre, silly, and out of character. He's had enough character development (thank God) that it's no longer realistic for him to haphazardly blurt out hateful things at people he cares about.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 28, 2011, 11:57:29 PM
I would react in a similar way if the ugly mother of the lost child I'm looking for in order to find a sense of purpose and morality in a post apocalyptic world told me to not look for her child because she wants to bang me.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 29, 2011, 12:53:42 AM
Hmm I might have missed some subtext there.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Neil on November 29, 2011, 07:46:05 AM
"we don't need to lost you too. (mumbles) let's bang"


Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on January 08, 2012, 07:43:57 PM
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52526 (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52526)

Yes, I know it's from the hacky "Ain't It Cool News", but it does present an awesome sense of potential that has been squandered now that a kick-ass visionary is no longer involved in this "beloved" series
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on January 10, 2012, 02:59:41 PM
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52526 (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52526)

Yes, I know it's from the hacky "Ain't It Cool News", but it does present an awesome sense of potential that has been squandered now that a kick-ass visionary is no longer involved in this "beloved" series

This just reaffirms the notion I had when I first heard of Darabont's leaving.  I felt the first season was too quickly paced but forgivable since they only had eight or nine episodes to tell that story.  I thought in the second season there was a lot of potential when they had twelve or thirteen episodes.  This would allow the plot, writing and characters to breath a little allowing for interesting subplots or episodes.  They wouldn't have to be so focused on getting the characters to the CDC but could have an episode like Darabont's excellent idea for the episode.  While I found the first season quickly paced, I thought the second has been a little slow.  If they would have used Darabont's idea for the season opener then told the same story in one less episode might have helped.  Also, I can't see such a great idea and big budget story be meant for a webisode.

2011 has been a horrendous year for AMC.  Darabount leaves or is forced out of Walking Dead.  I can't remember why or sure I really understand why he no longer part of the show.  They allow their quintessential series Mad Men to be delayed to the point of having to wait till the next year before the series can begin after having the series be off for a year and half.  Potentially had Breaking Bad not coming back for a final season or possibly having the series move to another network.  Allowing a show like The Killing that had so much potential and promise through the first three episodes to dissolve throughout the season and become just bad.  Finally, the show Hell on wheels is not up to par with the rest of the series on the channel.  I read the pilot script before watching it and not sure why AMC chose to green light the show.  Come on AMC!  You got a great line up.  Get your shit together.  
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 13, 2012, 12:34:49 AM
Just watched the mid-season premier.

For this episode, it's as if they made a long list of "things new viewers will need to know" and made a script out of that. It took me a while to realize it. That pretty much explains all the scenes in which one character, in inexplicably emphatic tones, tells another character something that's previously happened in the show, which the other character already knows. "Ohh, they're talking to the audience, not each other. This makes more sense now."

And in fact, it would have been far more entertaining with that foreknowledge. So you're welcome.

The episode was surprisingly decent in spite of all that. The method of having long quiet passages mixed with short intense scenes of action is actually working.

SPOILER

The worst thing about the episode was Lori's incident. That was quite stupid. Unless that walker crawls into the car and eats her and her somehow as-of-yet unzombified fetus. I would support that.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on February 13, 2012, 05:28:24 PM


SPOILER

The worst thing about the episode was Lori's incident. That was quite stupid. Unless that walker crawls into the car and eats her and her somehow as-of-yet unzombified fetus. I would support that.

SPOILERS

I hated Lori's accident. I can't stand it when characters do something stupid for no reason other than to create drama. There was no reason for Lori to go after Rick and Hershel. I thought the show ended well. It's interesting how seeing zombies is no longer shocking but when the group encounters other survivors that is now shocking. I liked the saloon standoff although I thought it was poorly done. JUSTIFIED SPOILER: the first episode of this season's Justified is an excellent example of how to set up and end an episode with a standoff. 
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 13, 2012, 06:09:58 PM
SPOILERS

I thought the show ended well. It's interesting how seeing zombies is no longer shocking but when the group encounters other survivors that is now shocking. I liked the saloon standoff although I thought it was poorly done. JUSTIFIED SPOILER: the first episode of this season's Justified is an excellent example of how to set up and end an episode with a standoff.

I thought that scene was great. I especially liked how the exact nature of the two was gradually revealed in the scene. The AV Club recap summed it up pretty well:

Quote
He and Tony are sick of wandering, and they want a new home, but there’s something off about them. Tony casually takes a piss against a wall, and, sure, Dave is friendly, but it’s not a trust-worthy kind of friendliness. Rick catches on immediately, Hershel does soon after, and it all builds to a shoot-out that leaves the two strangers dead.

This is one of the best scenes I’ve seen on the show so far, and it does any number of things that The Walking Dead has struggled with in the past. The tension builds naturally (due in no small part to Raymond-James), the dialogue has actual subtext, and there’s a clear sense of risk here that never pauses to telegraph itself. There’s no obvious and immediate proof that Dave and Tony are bad guys, but they’re suspicious just the same, and the suspense comes from never knowing just how much of a threat they really pose. I’ve seen this sort of sequence play out in dozens of movies before (although there isn’t much in the way of pop culture references, this has a Tarantino vibe to it, that sense of two men feeling each other out with words before they reach the point where violence is inevitable), but that didn’t make this particular example any less exciting to watch.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on February 13, 2012, 10:19:04 PM
I liked the scene.  Thought it's one of the best scenes of the entire series. Just whenever the show gets really good it shows it has potential of being a great show but never lives up to it. I think that scene sums up the entire series. It was really good but could have been great. Or I could just be me being too judgmental due to my anger over Lori.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on February 20, 2012, 02:05:33 AM
Spoilers

Usually with this series, I'm left thinking there is a better group of writers out there that could have done better with this plot or show. But tonight's show however I loved. I think they were brave enough to deliver on stuff they set up that I've seen other shows not deliver. First, I'm glad they didn't drag out Lori's stupid decision to go after Rick which I still don't understand.  I also liked that other characters suggested that Lori's decision was stupid where other shows would ignore that FACT. While the episode did a lot to set up of the rest of the season I especially liked how they handled the Jack, Sawyer and Kate situation or I mean the Rick, Shawn and Lori situation. I think I'm one of the many that ended up hating Kate's character in Lost. After seeing this episode it gives me hope that these writers are willing to confront issues instead of ignore them like Lost did.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 20, 2012, 02:20:05 AM
The Lori-Rick-Shane storyline is turning into a Macbeth riff and I love it.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 20, 2012, 02:56:55 AM
Some awkward writing as usual, but I liked the episode. It was especially well-directed. I loved that last shot on Rick. There was also a really oddball sequence (that I liked) inside the house when the camera followed around different sets of characters briefly (35:18).

The silly event of the week was definitely Glenn's pseudo-heroic pouting about not being brave enough.

I think I'm one of the many that ended up hating Kate's character in Lost. After seeing this episode it gives me hope that these writers are willing to confront issues instead of ignore them like Lost did.

Oh no you didn't! I will defend Lost to the death. What issues did Lost ignore?

Here's another Lost parallel... the new sort-of-prisoner and the whole "what do we do with him?" scenario is somewhat like Henry Gale in Lost Season 2.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on February 20, 2012, 11:45:40 AM
Last night seemed like a different show. I enjoyed the Justified-esque standoff at the end of the mid-season premiere and it seems like they're trying to give the show a bit more momentum.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 27, 2012, 02:28:27 AM
One of the best episodes yet.  :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on February 27, 2012, 07:03:31 PM
One of the best episodes yet.  :yabbse-thumbup:

Agreed. I didn't have a favorite episode of the series until last night's episode. The pacing along with the writing and directing really came together. The two shots of the zombie in the field were haunting.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 27, 2012, 07:38:38 PM
Does anyone know the name of the song that played at the end of the episode? Save me the trouble of looking it up my own damn self?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on February 27, 2012, 07:50:13 PM
Does anyone know the name of the song that played at the end of the episode? Save me the trouble of looking it up my own damn self?

Wye Oak - Civilian
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 27, 2012, 08:07:10 PM
Damn.  My dad has been proselytizing Wye Oak to me for months and I kept blowing off listening to them.  I hate when other people are right about things.

Thank you, though.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 27, 2012, 09:23:16 PM
That song they played is great, but I don't really like the rest of the album.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Fernando on March 06, 2012, 03:00:09 PM
spoiler for sunday's ep.

so dale is dead and it is because of carl...

...someone put a leash on that kid. wonder if the gun he lost will have any consequences in the future..
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 06, 2012, 06:28:26 PM
spoilers

Indeed. Carl is a stupid little twerp. They need to keep him locked in a playpen or something until he grows up.

The Dale thing was pretty surreal. I was surprised how easily and quickly that zombie dug into his torso, like it was strawberry pie or something.

The Lost parallels just keep rolling in. We had the prisoner we didn't know what to do with (check), who in this episode was tortured by a lone wolf type without permission from the rest of the group (check). We also have "the others," and an encounter with them appears likely. Should be interesting.

When everything goes down, I predict they will retreat to the secret hatch in the barn.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 06, 2012, 07:05:28 PM
Not a spoiler, but speculation:

I'm pretty sure they're going to kill off Carl, possibly at the end of this season (only 2 remaining episodes makes this a long-shot), but most likely in the third season.  There are narrative reasons that make me suspect this, but they're reinforced by the Walt Problem, which is what happens when you cast a child on a series in which the timeline of the story is so much shorter than the timeline of production.  You either hope nobody notices that this 9-year-old is six feet tall with a beard, you recast, or you get rid of the character.  I don't see any scenario in which Carl makes it to the end of season three alive.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 06, 2012, 08:51:03 PM
I don't see any scenario in which Carl makes it to the end of season three alive.

I've already described the solution:

They need to keep him locked in a playpen or something until he grows up.

But I guess I disagree. It's not as if the actor is 13, right? He's going to look young for a while still. And they seem to be grooming him for a coming-of-age plotline and/or some sort of heroics. I just get that feeling.

There's also the fact that he's already faced death. Wouldn't it be too redundant/tiresome to put him in that position again, so soon?

Or maybe he gets captured by The Others, to complete the Lost connection.

Just had an epiphany: This show is more similar to Lost than Alcatraz, Terra Nova, Once Upon A Time, or Persons of Interest.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on March 06, 2012, 09:23:25 PM
He will be sent upstairs, never to be seen again.

Hopefully his mother will follow him up there.................

I've become rather disillusioned with this show. The zombies are the best written characters; the "living" characters are constantly upsetting in their stupidity. They lack all (common)survival skills(sense). I'm surprised they're able to get milk from a cow.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 06, 2012, 10:35:28 PM
The reviewer at the AV Club made a similar point, which I agreed with. The show's biggest weakness is that the characters don't make sense, both in their stupidity and their lack of cohesion.

As for stupidity, well, there are plenty of examples. It's always bothered me how nonchalant everyone is about getting zombie blood on themselves and even on their faces. They have no problem with getting close enough to stab a zombie in the head. I guess I'm used to the logic of 28 Days Later, where a single drop of blood in your eye can get you infected (spoiler). Which kinda makes more sense.

It also bothers me how much gasoline they use. It's a finite freaking resource (especially now that production has ceased, given the zombie apocalypse), and yet they casually drive around all over the place. I'm sorry, but what happened to the horses? Take a horse to town if you really must go. Where exactly do they plan to get gas in the future? The various bands of scavengers (including The Others) have probably already siphoned gas from every car in the area. With less and less gas available, they will have to go farther and farther to find it, using more fuel in the process and putting themselves in greater danger.

As for lack of cohesion, it really is unrealistic how uncohesive they are. Always bickering about the stupidest things, never coming together except for someone's funeral... this is just not how people operate in these situations. People typically come together in the toughest times. Sure there will be some unrest, but on this show they've taken the personality clashes and petty conflicts to an irrational extreme, to the point that it damages the characters. Nearly every character... even Dale.

Compare that to Lost... which actually had a nuanced picture of what happens when a bunch of strangers are put together in a survival situation.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 12, 2012, 03:10:27 AM
Wow. Best episode yet.

And I mean it this time. I never thought I would say this about The Walking Dead, but this might be an episode to rewatch.

SPOILERS

Aside from the obvious greatness toward the end, the episode had excellent character scenes and tasteful pacing, and I couldn't find much to complain about... which just doesn't happen.

Seems like they put more work into the editing this week. The opening sequence was one of the best they've done, and everything else was pretty much spot on.

I knew Rick had something up his sleeve in that confrontation. Quite a magic trick he did there... it was basically "keep your eye on my gun" and Shane fell for it.

Shane's content was fantastic (all of it)...

- It's deliciously ironic that Lori's attempt to reach out to Shane caused him to believe he had an opportunity to replace Rick.
- I love that Shane is the only person who found out where The Others are located but will not have an opportunity to share that information.
- It was especially satisfying to see him get outsmarted by Rick and Daryl in the space of ten minutes, and in his last episode.

The other big revelation this episode is that anyone who dies (and is not shot or stabbed in the head) automatically becomes a zombie, which I guess is something we could have concluded from the dead officers earlier in the season who were found with no bites. This would certainly explain the number of zombies. Is it something in the air, then? A military experiment gone wrong? Some change to the earth's atmosphere caused by an alien virus?

I haven't read the comics, so don't answer that.

And this brings us full circle back to the zombie fetus discussion. I hope Lori's pregnancy goes alright, because any mother who miscarries in this world is going to have a seriously awkward problem.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 12, 2012, 09:44:56 PM
SPOILERS
(Seriously, if you're not up to date on the episodes, you should probably just stay out of this thread altogether)

This was by far the best episode since the pilot.  Every aspect of the show just felt like a step up, from the writing to the directing to the editing to the acting.  If the last few episodes are representative of the post-Darabont era, then I say good riddance.

I'm seeing a lot of people online freaking out over the death of Shane, how it takes away the show's biggest (non-zombie) antagonist.  I'm all for it.  Even though I thought Shane was a great character, having him around this deep into the series was limiting the growth of the Rick character.  With Shane around, he will always be the "good" alternative to Shane's bad guy.  Without Shane, he's going to have to end up being the character who will do whatever it takes to keep his people alive, at whatever cost to his soul.  Rick in the comics goes some seriously dark places, and I'm sincerely hoping the show is willing to go there.

Now that we have confirmation that anyone who dies becomes a zombie, regardless of being bitten, what are the betting odds that's what the scientist whispered about to Rick at the end of the first season?  I'm trying to remember from a couple episodes ago; when they saw the cop zombies who didn't have any bites, was Rick surprised by that or not?

And JB, I'm not up to date on the comics, but from what I have read, Kirkman makes no effort to explain the source of the zombification, and from what I understand he has no intention to.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 12, 2012, 10:56:56 PM
SPOILERS:

They actually gave T-Dog some lines this week. Maybe next week he'll graduate from his role as the token grave digger.

In all seriousness, I'm glad to see Shane and Dale go. As interesting a character as Shane was, they had no where else to go with him, same with Dale. I was a little upset the show didn't have the balls to have Carl shoot a non-zombified Shane, but the unpredictability of Rick's knife move was a nice touch.

There's still some inconsistent characterization (Hershel, Lori), but the show is finding it's footing. 


Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 13, 2012, 01:33:58 AM
In all seriousness, I'm glad to see Shane and Dale go. As interesting a character as Shane was, they had no where else to go with him, same with Dale.

I agree. As much as I liked Dale in the beginning (remember for a few episodes, he was the only interesting character), his moral outcries had run their course and had nowhere to go but shrillness.

I was a little upset the show didn't have the balls to have Carl shoot a non-zombified Shane

I don't think Carl had arrived yet. He arrived to see his dad over the freshly-killed Shane, without context, and that was the source of his trauma/confusion.

There's still some inconsistent characterization (Hershel, Lori), but the show is finding it's footing.

I don't think Hershel's characterization is inconsistent. Hershel might actually be one of the show's best-developed characters. Remember he had an epiphany after they killed the barn zombies. He became a bit mopey and embarrassed. Immediately following that, Rick saved his life, proving that Hershel and his group need protection and that Rick could provide it. (In the bar shootout scene, there was even a shot of Hershel showing his "I'm impressed!" face.) Shane was the only person Hershel strongly disliked (and for good reason). He even finally approved of "the Asian boy."

I'm seeing a lot of people online freaking out over the death of Shane, how it takes away the show's biggest (non-zombie) antagonist.  I'm all for it.  Even though I thought Shane was a great character, having him around this deep into the series was limiting the growth of the Rick character.  With Shane around, he will always be the "good" alternative to Shane's bad guy.  Without Shane, he's going to have to end up being the character who will do whatever it takes to keep his people alive, at whatever cost to his soul.  Rick in the comics goes some seriously dark places, and I'm sincerely hoping the show is willing to go there.

I think I agree. Rick has already started to grow in that way, with his near-execution of Randall and now knifing Shane (albeit with some tears). Now with the two most volatile main characters gone (Shane and Dale), and with Randall gone too, and with Hershel apparently satisfied, whatever conflict is next has to involve Rick (moral ambiguity or something else), and maybe The Others.

I'm trying to remember from a couple episodes ago; when they saw the cop zombies who didn't have any bites, was Rick surprised by that or not?

I just checked. Rick wasn't surprised or even curious. Shane was the curious one, and Rick (rather briefly) explained it away by pointing out scratches and saying they probably got infected that way.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on March 17, 2012, 10:49:32 PM
http://chattypics.com/files/housecarl_2tt6mcu6q8.jpg (http://chattypics.com/files/housecarl_2tt6mcu6q8.jpg)

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on March 19, 2012, 02:36:03 AM
Spoilers

Enjoyed the season finale. Although I still completely hate Lori. Lori who knew she was pregnant but crashed a car going after Rick which I still don't understand why she did that.  Lori who has no idea where her son is have the time.  Lori who is pregnant but still threatens to jump out of a moving truck to go back to a overrun farm.  Lori who once hears how Shane tries to kill Rick turns on Rick when only a few episodes ago she was the one warning Rick how Shane had lost it. Forgetting Lori. I had always thought that Rick and Shane were two extremes.  The best leader for the group was the leader being somewhere in the middle. It seems that Rick killing Shane has gotten him closer to the leader he needs to be or the group needs although right now he seems uncomfortable in the situation. I liked what they set up for the next season meaning both the base or what ever the last shot was and the hooded figure that saved Andrea.  The hooded figure seemed well adapted to the situation.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 19, 2012, 06:51:33 PM
Based on how everything is shaping up for next season, if you want to avoid spoilers for the TV show and you haven't read the comics yet, now would not be the time to start.  Season 2 veered pretty far from the version of the story in the books, but the end of this season makes it look like they're veering right back toward it.  I have to say, though, if they're going to be stuck in one location all season again, the prison should be a little more dynamic than Herschel's farm was.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 19, 2012, 07:25:45 PM
Based on how everything is shaping up for next season, if you want to avoid spoilers for the TV show and you haven't read the comics yet, now would not be the time to start.  Season 2 veered pretty far from the version of the story in the books, but the end of this season makes it look like they're veering right back toward it.  I have to say, though, if they're going to be stuck in one location all season again, the prison should be a little more dynamic than Herschel's farm was.

Thanks for the warning. I will stay away for now.

Don't answer this, because I'm sure it's dealt with in the comics, but... How would they expect to get into the prison? Wouldn't it be crawling with walkers? Or is this a disused prison? And isn't it unlikely that the prison is unclaimed by any of the various roaming bands of Others, especially given the ridiculous amount of time they spent on the farm?

Spoilers

Enjoyed the season finale. Although I still completely hate Lori. Lori who knew she was pregnant but crashed a car going after Rick which I still don't understand why she did that.  Lori who has no idea where her son is have the time.  Lori who is pregnant but still threatens to jump out of a moving truck to go back to a overrun farm.  Lori who once hears how Shane tries to kill Rick turns on Rick when only a few episodes ago she was the one warning Rick how Shane had lost it. Forgetting Lori. I had always thought that Rick and Shane were two extremes.  The best leader for the group was the leader being somewhere in the middle. It seems that Rick killing Shane has gotten him closer to the leader he needs to be or the group needs although right now he seems uncomfortable in the situation. I liked what they set up for the next season meaning both the base or what ever the last shot was and the hooded figure that saved Andrea.  The hooded figure seemed well adapted to the situation.

Even though it was kind of a weirdly structured transition episode, I also enjoyed it.

I'm really annoyed by Lori's completely unreasonable response to Rick's revelation. Even (or especially?) after his explanation, she's somehow horrified by him? I seriously expected her to give him a hug or something, for what he just went through, having to kill his best friend, but no. I'm sorry... Rick acted mostly in self defense against a psychopath (with rapey tendencies, Lori should be reminded) who wanted to murder him. Did he not shed a sufficient volume of tears atop Shane's corpse?

Other thoughts...

Even when I agree with Carl, he's still a little twerp that needs to keep his mouth shut and not do anything. They could keep him in the trunk.

One of Hershel's ambiguous blonde daughters was eliminated, so that's helpful. (The walkers got the non-suicidal one.)

I almost booed when Carol was saved. I hate myself.

I see the "bicker over anything and everything" directive is still in effect. It's as if the writers don't believe a scene is complete until there's a disagreement between two or more characters.

Oh and I have some nitpicking to do. At the end of the previous episode, there were two gunshots. The first was Shane's, as Rick knifed him. And yet the zombie POV opener showed only one gunshot, which was supposedly Carl's. Shouldn't we blame Shane for that first gunshot?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on March 20, 2012, 04:19:02 PM
Spoilers

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/the-best-memes-from-the-walking-dead-season-two (http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/the-best-memes-from-the-walking-dead-season-two)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 20, 2012, 05:01:49 PM
Some of those are really funny. Is that last one actually from the comic?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on March 21, 2012, 04:00:03 PM
Some of those are really funny. Is that last one actually from the comic?

These kinds of meme things are popular now and usually dumb but saw those and actually made me laugh.  The one with Rick and Glenn talking about how you have to be a moron to crash a car in the apocalypse then a pick of Lori right before she crashed is my favorite.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 22, 2012, 08:28:19 PM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-the-walking-dead-has-to-get-better/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-the-walking-dead-has-to-get-better/)

Some good points.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on April 11, 2012, 12:43:33 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/walking-dead-robert-kirkman-thief-of-thieves-amc-development-310260 (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/walking-dead-robert-kirkman-thief-of-thieves-amc-development-310260)

AMC is developing a television series out of The Walking Dead creator Robert Kirkman's other comic book theif of thieves.  I don't know anything about the comic book except it's pretty new.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on July 16, 2012, 02:57:47 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShQz68Zkb3Y
Looks good
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: modage on July 16, 2012, 03:03:15 PM
But won't be.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on July 16, 2012, 03:15:18 PM
The Walking Dead can't ever fix all its problems, otherwise what would the internet have to bitch about?

The biggest issue with the Darabont era was that the stakes never felt as high as they should.  4 out every 5 episodes felt too safe, and on those few episodes where they fucked with that, the show just clicks.  I have every reason to believe this season won't have that problem.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 05, 2012, 02:58:05 AM
The new season is so good, you guys.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on November 05, 2012, 10:02:42 AM
That felt like a season finale to me. Both this show and Dexter are in my "once promising shows bounce back" category this season.

It was nice that they replaced their token black guy so quickly.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Neil on November 05, 2012, 12:58:46 PM
The only thing this show needed to do right was further itself from the garbage pile that Frank Darabont built.  They did that.

This shit is working if you ask me.  There's plenty of problems in there that are still being worked out, but boy o' boy do they have to take a back seat to a physical apocalypse. Maybe this actually means some things will never be worked out, but I'm very interested to see what it is they do.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 07, 2012, 06:18:38 PM
The new season is so good, you guys.

It sure is. I think it's reasonable to say the show has achieved its potential. This last episode was at least in the top 3. The last scene was flawless (SPOILERS INCOMING), starting with Maggie's slow walk (and all the complex emotions going on there). I loved Rick's agony. Carl could be one of my favorite characters now (unless they overplay it), because he seriously gave me chills.

The plotting is also great, because Rick's decision to leave that guy to die basically led to his wife dying. He's going to be so jaded. This is some legit character development. And *gasp* it's not done by talking for half the episode!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Neil on November 15, 2012, 03:35:02 PM
I thoroughly enjoyed, "say the word."  I'm glad the show finally got some guts. 

Is the silence in this thread due to lack of viewing?

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: socketlevel on November 15, 2012, 04:02:41 PM
the cliffhanger of the last episode is probably one of my favourite devices used in the comic book. I really hope they stretch it out nice and long in the show, and don't just make only for the next episode.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on December 03, 2012, 08:05:40 AM
the cliffhanger of the last episode is probably one of my favourite devices used in the comic book. I really hope they stretch it out nice and long in the show, and don't just make only for the next episode.

I've never read the comic book, but I'd say if that device was what I think it was, they just did what you didn't want to be done.

Season has been great so far.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on December 04, 2012, 03:25:38 PM
Great half of a season. The annoyances and problems from last season didn't show up. I now feel like maybe the writers over reached last year believing they could do the entire season on the farm. The lack of natural/organic problems from living a sheltered life on the farm led to writers having to force conflict or situations.  This half of the season has been it's best run of episodes since the beginning. Last season I was annoyed by both Laurie and Carl characters but have been converted. I'm enjoying the new bad ass Carl and was I was hit hard by Laurie's death. Last season, I would have said the show would never kill Laurie, Carl or Rick.  I was wrong and glad I was cause this kind of show needs that kind of balls to kill off a character like that and in that way.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on December 07, 2012, 06:56:07 PM
Great half of a season. The annoyances and problems from last season didn't show up. I now feel like maybe the writers over reached last year believing they could do the entire season on the farm. The lack of natural/organic problems from living a sheltered life on the farm led to writers having to force conflict or situations.

I totally agree. In my opinion, though, I saw it as a transparent way to save money. Less world outside + people who are rabid over the show simply because it features Zombies (despite uneven quality of episodes) + ratings and people buying it on DVD/related products = bigger budget for Season 3.

I also agree, though, that the writers have learned a bit from the fumbles of their previous seasons. I usually don't like when they wink & nod at the online-discussion niche of the audience...but it was great to see them address the non-romantic relationship between Carol and Daryl (hey! a rhyme!), confront the idea that someone thought Carol was a lesbian because of her short hair, and give T-Dog more than 2 lines of dialouge before he went ka-put.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on December 21, 2012, 01:47:40 PM
THE WALKING DEAD Renewed for Season 4; Showrunner Glen Mazzara Exits the Series Over “Difference of Opinion”
Source: Collider

AMC is getting really good at dicking around the showrunners of their most popular and creatively beloved shows.  The network’s frequent headbutting with Mad Men creator/showrunner Matthew Weiner is no secret, and they edged out The Walking Dead creator/showrunner Frank Darabont halfway through the hit zombie series’ second season.  Now, in a shocking move on the heels of a season four renewal, current The Walking Dead showrunner Glen Mazzara has announced that he’s leaving the show over a “difference of opinion” with the network.

Here’s the full announcement from AMC and Mazzara:

Today, AMC announces the season 4 pick-up of The Walking Dead.

AMC also jointly announces with Glen Mazzara today that for future seasons, the two parties have mutually decided to part ways.  Glen guided the series creatively for seasons 2 and 3.  AMC is grateful for his hard work.  We are both proud of our shared success.

Both parties acknowledge that there is a difference of opinion about where the show should go moving forward, and conclude that it is best to part ways.  This decision is amicable and Glen will remain on for post-production on season 3B as showrunner and executive producer.

Frankly, this is surprising news.  Since Mazzara took over the reins of the show from Darabont, the series has seen a crazy increase in viewership and critical acclaim.  Not only is it breaking ratings for cable television, it’s regularly beating everything on network TV as well.  Season three is generally considered the best installment of the show thus far, and a large part of that is thanks to Mazzara’s involvement as showrunner alongside comics creator/executive producer Robert Kirkman.

I don’t know what, specifically, Mazzara and AMC disagreed on, but this is getting ridiculous.  The official statement makes clear that Mazzara isn’t moving on out of a disinterest with the show, but over a difference of opinion with the network.  What’s next, AMC tells Vince Gilligan to turn Breaking Bad into a buddy comedy in order to extend the series’ run past the upcoming final season?

There’s no word on who will be stepping in to replace Mazzara as showrunner, but I feel like Kirkman is the guy for the job.  He’s been with the series from the beginning and has acted as both an executive producer and writer on the show, so The Walking Dead would most assuredly be in good hands if he stepped in.  Seriously, though, AMC has got to stop messing with their successes.

Here are individual statements from Mazzara, Kirkman, and producer Gale Anne Hurd:

My time as showrunner on The Walking Dead has been an amazing experience, but after I finish season 3, it’s time to move on.  I have told the stories I wanted to tell and connected with our fans on a level that I never imagined. It doesn’t get much better than that. Thank you to everyone who has been a part of this journey. – Glen Mazzara

I am in full support of both AMC and Glen Mazzara in the decision they have come to and believe the parties came to this decision in the best interest of the future of the show. I thank Glen for his hard work and appreciate his many contributions to The Walking Dead and look forward to working with him as we complete post production on Season 3. I am also excited to begin work on another spectacular season of this show that I know means so much to so many people. This show has always been the result of a wide range of extremely talented men and women working tirelessly to produce their best work collectively. I believe the future is bright for The Walking Dead. Thank you to the fans for your continued support. – Robert Kirkman

I am appreciative and grateful to Glen for his hard work on ‘The Walking Dead.’ I am supportive of AMC and Glen’s decision and know that the series is in great hands with one of the most talented and dedicated casts and crews in the business. I look forward to the show’s continued success. – Gale Anne Hurd
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on January 09, 2013, 11:55:32 PM


2011 has been a horrendous year for AMC.  Darabount leaves or is forced out of Walking Dead.  I can't remember why or sure I really understand why he no longer part of the show.  They allow their quintessential series Mad Men to be delayed to the point of having to wait till the next year before the series can begin after having the series be off for a year and half.  Potentially had Breaking Bad not coming back for a final season or possibly having the series move to another network but still not giving them the two seasons they asked for.  Allowing a show like The Killing that had so much potential and promise through the first three episodes to dissolve throughout the season and become just bad.  Finally, the show Hell on wheels is not up to par with the rest of the series on the channel.  I read the pilot script before watching it and not sure why AMC chose to green light the show.  Come on AMC!  You got a great line up.  Get your shit together. 

That was my first ever Xixax post one year ago to the day.  I honestly didn't plan it.  One year later and having to post the same thing again. To go along with the previous post I read about Shawn Ryan (The Shield) asking on twitter why anyone would bring their shows to AMC after they've fired two showrunners on Walking Dead which is the most successful show on cable right now.  I have to agree. He didn't even mention the shit that has gone on with Mad Men and Breaking Bad. Mad Men isn't what is was before the layoff. AMC did it to themselves. I don't know why anyone would bring a show to AMC after this. 
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 27, 2013, 10:12:43 PM
Spoilers if you're not caught up...

The season's still going well I guess, but I think they're doing incredible damage to the Andrea character. She is so profoundly stupid and directionless that I have stopped caring about her.

I get that the writers must be trying to turn her slowly, but the slowness reached the point of absurdity several episodes ago. Now it's just comical. She went to the prison and got 100% of the information she needed to make good life choices, but she decided to be dumb and immediately went back to Woodbury to sleep with the governor. What?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on February 28, 2013, 02:32:42 PM
Spoilers if you're not caught up...

The season's still going well I guess, but I think they're doing incredible damage to the Andrea character. She is so profoundly stupid and directionless that I have stopped caring about her.

I get that the writers must be trying to turn her slowly, but the slowness reached the point of absurdity several episodes ago. Now it's just comical. She went to the prison and got 100% of the information she needed to make good life choices, but she decided to be dumb and immediately went back to Woodbury to sleep with the governor. What?

I liked how Andrea didn't choose to stay at the prison. It's honest to her character and against what you would expect from a show. I don't think the group told Andrea anything she didn't know. Michonne seemed to think Andrea was naive to who the Governor really is but I think Andrea knew all along. Last season, Andrea was the only one on Shane's side. As Shane alienated the rest of his group with his actions to "protect" everyone, she agreed with Shane's view of what one has to do to survive in this world.  She even slept with him and wanted to leave with him when Shane said he was going to leave the group. So Andrea being attracted to and choosing a violent nut over the group isn't anything new.

The episode after the group gets back to the prison was annoying. This season has earned credit but if that episode happened last season it would have made me want to give up on the show. The group knows they are going to be attacked by a larger and better armed group and yet Rick is wondering the woods, Glenn goes off, Hershel wonders around on his one leg, people are standing out in the open and they did nothing except put up some wood along the chain link fence. 
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 28, 2013, 04:52:01 PM
I guess Andrea is attracted to the alpha males, and I think you're right about her having that "whatever needs to be done" attitude in the past. But I don't think she's been characterized like that AT ALL this season. She's mostly a softie. She wants everyone to get along. For God's sake, she even has concerns about letting the asthmatic kid train in the militia.

When she sees the death match, she's like, "Noooo guys don't do that! That's mean! It's kind of messed up too!" But nothing else happens. She's so impotent. When she calls the governor out on his lies, she's like, "Hey, don't lie to me! That's mean!" He's like "whatever" and nothing changes.

When she learns that the governor tried to hunt down and murder Michonne, and captured/tortured/terrorized Maggie & Glen for absolutely no morally defensible reason, and just assaulted the prison after directly lying to her about it... she is clearly unsettled and knows it's all wrong, but is somehow physically incapable of following through on any of those convictions or even delaying her nonsensical trajectory back into the governor's bed. I'm sorry, but that's not challenging viewer expectations in any valuable way... it's simply dumb.

I doubt anything she eventually does will be sufficiently redemptive. We'll see.

Oh and I loved this bit from the AV Club review:


Standing naked over the Governor with a knife in her hand in the episode’s last scene, she ponders her next move, and we try and follow her thoughts: Is she contemplating Carol’s bizarre advice? Is she planning a ritual sacrifice to the gods, in the hopes that this might end the zombie menace? Does she think the Governor might need a knife for something? It’s probably the first question, but they’re all just as meaningless. Choosing to stay with him, to not kill him, doesn’t count as a defining moment, because it’s simply doing what she’s been doing the entire season. Pulling that knife was as random as not stabbing anyone with it. It’s an action that exists solely to create tension, and sure, there is automatic suspense in a weapon held over a sleeping person, but it doesn’t do anything else, and it certainly doesn’t strengthen our sense of who the fuck Andrea is.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 03, 2013, 01:39:42 PM
These past episodes feel like plot stalling. I think they jumped the gun confronting the Governor at the mid season finale. Now they've ratcheted up the tension between the two camps and they have to drag their feet until the season finale to give it any kind of closure. The attack on Woodbury mainly amounted to a lot of loud noises and an eye missing, and the return attack on the prison was the same thing (with a dead side character they transparently develop right before his death). Shows with good character drama can shift away from the action and still remain riveting, but this show isn't handling it well. With the seasons cut in half there's all this need to have a "big finale moment" that ends up writing the show into corners. Showing the prison at the end of Season 2, attacking Woodbury, the Sophia reveal, these are meant to be jaw dropping moments, but the stalling it takes to get to them is too infuriating to have them really pay off.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 04, 2013, 12:48:19 AM
...and we're back
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 04, 2013, 01:14:04 AM
Yeah, excellent episode. And that was certainly some long-overdue quality Michonne content.

The "clear" business reminded me of Scientology.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 04, 2013, 02:22:22 AM
I take it as an excellent sign for the future that the writer of this episode is the guy tapped to be show runner for season four, because this is a man who clearly understands what makes the show great, the times that it's great. Everything about this episode was perfect, and the little coda of them backing up, grabbing the pack, and driving off was whatever one step above perfect would be.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on March 22, 2013, 01:59:01 AM
Just watched the last couple episodes in a row with a friend.

I want to hate on the show and fans for making the terrible season 2 feel like their mecca.
If I meet you, and loved season 2, I think you're dumb.
So as much as I hesitate to say this, I'm enjoying this season. "Clear" really seems to have done it.
And despite predictability (I knew Milton would end up being a good fella), the writers have decided to finally give some depth to their characters (note use of the word "some").

Despite any unexpected appreciation on my behalf, we still call the people in Woodbury "The Others" and have taken to calling Herschel "Less Crazy Locke."
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Tictacbk on March 22, 2013, 03:24:03 AM
Are there actually people out there who praise season 2?  That's a serious question.  I thought it was generally regarded (at least the first half) as the low point of the series (so far...), right?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on March 25, 2013, 07:07:29 AM
Are there actually people out there who praise season 2?  That's a serious question.  I thought it was generally regarded (at least the first half) as the low point of the series (so far...), right?

sadly THERE ARE.
The day after s2 ended, my friend posted that it was a "Walking Dead knocks it out of the park with a PERFECT ending to a PERFECT Season". No exaggeration.
Then when my other friend ranted to her about the very glaring things the show lacks, especially in season 2, she responded by saying "oh, well I write Zombie fan fiction so I'm more in tune with the genre than you are."
Goofy.
I'm even surprised there were people on board, ENTHUSIASTIC people, after the whole "let's try to develop these characters and not spend much money and string together a facsimile of a plot by having a bunch of people argue on a farm" thing. So far I've watched s3 with jaded eyes, and even though that doesn't justify it as a great show, it has been much more fun and interesting to watch than the previous stuff.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 25, 2013, 12:26:38 PM
Season 2 had some amazing dark moments (S2 spoilers incoming). Namely, Sophia's fate, and Rick killing Shane. Those were pretty spectacular, and certainly more effective in contrast to all the grinding boredom. I spent most of Season 2 desperately hoping that Lori would miscarry and a zombie fetus would emerge.

The only major complaint I have with Season 3 is the epic blossoming of Andrea's dimwittedness. Otherwise, it's pretty much what I wanted. Rick got very interesting, and they did away with the "let's just have everyone arguing 100% of the time every day, because we don't know what else to write dialogue about" method. That's really all you can ask.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 25, 2013, 01:43:47 PM
I'm not really that into the second half of Season 3. The first half hit a great pace, now it feels like feet dragging again. Notice the best episodes of both Season 2 and 3 involve Rick breaking off from the group/main story for a side mission. I also hate how they've bumbled the Governor as a character. They've made him a mustache twirling villain, when in reality all he's done to Rick's group is shoot the prisoner character no one cared about and made Maggie take off her shirt.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 25, 2013, 01:54:14 PM
I think making the Governor into a complex and effective villain is too much to ask of the show. They've just barely mastered the basics of television writing... I've never expected them to fully deliver on the Governor's potential.

You're right, though. It's like they started trying to make him a bit morally ambiguous, but once they got there they weren't sure what to do with it, so his character just ends up being blurry in an ineffectual way.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on March 25, 2013, 03:48:13 PM
The show has too many episodes a season. 10 to 13 episodes is perfect amount for these types of shows. If you fuck with the amount of episodes you fuck with the show. I consider The Wire's 5th season by and far the worst of all the seasons. I think a lot of it is due to it only being 10 episodes. You could tell the writers were used to 12 to 13 a season.

It's the same with adding episodes. I really enjoyed the first half. Now it seems they are just delaying the confrontation because they need it for the finale. It feels like a 12 episode season stretched to 16. With 12 episodes, you have the first 8 which we liked. Then you have four until the finale. One of those is rescuing Daryl so that's three left.

I have to defend the writers just a little. The writers are being asked to deliver two finales a season due to the mid season breaks. Also, it's not the writers, like the Breaking Bad writers, asking for more episodes it's AMC. I have to guess they would choose 12 over 16 episodes cause it's clear from the second half of this season that they could do this season in 12 and they're struggling to fill 16.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 25, 2013, 04:03:42 PM
Good points. Part of me still says they should have figured out a way to make it not feel stretched. They're supposed to be creative people, and properly structuring a season is their job, so I think that's a fair thing to ask of them, unless the extra episodes were sprung on them later. I would be interested to hear more about the making of this season.

Since we're comparing the Breaking Bad and Walking Dead writing staffs... I've heard Nerdist Writers Panels (http://www.nerdist.com/podcast/nerdist-writers-panel/) with both of them. The difference is crystal clear. The Walking Dead writing staff is combative by design. People pitch ideas and are supposed to defend them under fire. This is apparently a thing. Vince Gilligan has several times expressed his dislike for this model, and he wanted to have a deeply collaborative and amiable writing staff. Whenever you hear the Breaking Bad writers talking to each other, there's so much warmth and respect and excitement about what they're creating together. Then you listen to the Walking Dead staff, and there's this tension and resentment just under the surface of their jokey-combative relationship.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 25, 2013, 06:28:48 PM
That's a great observation about the writing staff, I think it plays a part for sure. I can imagine what it was like trying to pitch that Morgan episode story, he must have gotten a lot of push back for that.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Tictacbk on April 01, 2013, 05:35:10 PM
What a disappointing end to another disappointing season to an overall disappointing show.  There just seemed to be no good choices made here and nothing about it felt like a "finale".  So very little of it followed any line of logic.  I'm interested to listen to those Nerdist Writer's Panel eps now to see what I can glean from them about how not to run a writer's room. 

I've already dropped this show once and picked it back up, but I might be completely done with it now.  Maybe not though, the new showrunner wrote the best episode this season and I'm usually in the mood for zombies when it comes back in October.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on April 06, 2013, 01:38:04 PM
Yeah, the silence about the whole season finale says a lot about it. It didn't feel that bad to me (but then again, I'm not as hard on this show as many seem to be) but it certainly didn't feel like a season finale worth remembering.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 06, 2013, 02:04:29 PM
Yeah, it was decent. There's not much to say about it.

(SPOILERS)

Andrea dying was definitely a plus, but I genuinely hoped Milton would survive and join the main group; he would have added an interesting dynamic for sure. His character had surprisingly become one of the best.

The governor should have died, and he should have done so spectacularly. I don't understand what he would contribute to a subsequent season, unless he resurfaces as the eyepatched leader of a cannibal biker gang. Also, Woodbury currently doesn't make sense. I understand that it's less safe than the prison, but surely they can't leave it there for some other crazy group to take over. It's sort of a priceless thing, actually. Maybe they'll resolve this early next season.

It would be hilarious if Woodbury became occupied and the next season simply repeated the Woodbury vs. Prison story. I'm willing to bet that was considered in the writer's room.

Of course, the biggest issue will be how to feed all those people they brought in. Are they going to start farming like they've always talked about? That sounds really exciting.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Neil on April 06, 2013, 04:13:26 PM
SPOILERS
Pretty much agree with these;
It didn't feel that bad to me (but then again, I'm not as hard on this show as many seem to be).

Andrea dying was definitely a plus.

What JB has said is pretty much the essence of the show.  From what I'm told the Graphic Novel is much more fulfilling, but the same person told me it was a lot more "rapey."  but despite the fact that this show is ALWAYS leaving something to be desired, I'm still interested.

I can't explain why, but I still watch it, and some of the moments in the show work for me. But, you won't find me in a corner trying to defend it because it's seems the writers can't decide what the show is about, other than walkers, but throughout the seasons there have been a few themes that I'm waiting for the show itself to latch onto, and it never fully commits, it just moves on.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on April 08, 2013, 03:37:36 AM
By the way, is there an American Horror Story thread on Xixax? Search tells me no, but I'm not so sure whether it's working properly or not. I'm asking this because here in Portugal for the last couple of years one TV station gave us a double bill of horror every week with Walking Dead and American Horror Story, and this second season of the later was amazing. When American Horror Story keeps their stupid visual flourishes to rest and focus on its themes and characters, it's really fucked up and disturbing in the best possible way. It was great watching these shows back to back.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Sleepless on June 07, 2013, 03:45:56 PM
Never watched the show, so I don't know who this is or if she's a main character or what:

‘Walking Dead’ Actress Arrested in Ricin Letters Sent to Obama, Bloomberg

Actress Shannon Richardson, who has appeared on “The Walking Dead” and “Vampire Diaries,” was arrested Friday afternoon in connection with ricin-laced letters sent to President Obama and New York mayor Michael Bloomberg.

NBC News first reported the arrest.

News comes two weeks after Richardson had reached out to authorities claiming her husband, Nathan Richardson, had sent the letters. Nathan, an army veteran, has since been questioned by the FBI.

Shannon recently contacted authorities claiming she had found suspicious materials in her refrigerator that could be connected to the letters but investigators are now saying she was the one who sent the letters.

“You will have to kill me and my family before you get my guns,” the message sent to Bloomberg read, according to NBC New York. “Anyone who wants to come to my house will get shot in the face. The right to bear arms is my constitutional God given right and I will exercise that right till the day I die.”

Richardson is currently at federal court in Texas awaiting arraignment.

Source: Variety (http://variety.com/2013/film/news/walking-dead-actress-arrested-in-ricin-letters-sent-to-obama-bloomberg-1200494141/)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on June 07, 2013, 04:11:27 PM
Never watched the show, so I don't know who this is or if she's a main character or what:

‘Walking Dead’ Actress Arrested in Ricin Letters Sent to Obama, Bloomberg

Actress Shannon Richardson, who has appeared on “The Walking Dead” and “Vampire Diaries,” was arrested Friday afternoon in connection with ricin-laced letters sent to President Obama and New York mayor Michael Bloomberg.

NBC News first reported the arrest.

News comes two weeks after Richardson had reached out to authorities claiming her husband, Nathan Richardson, had sent the letters. Nathan, an army veteran, has since been questioned by the FBI.

Shannon recently contacted authorities claiming she had found suspicious materials in her refrigerator that could be connected to the letters but investigators are now saying she was the one who sent the letters.

“You will have to kill me and my family before you get my guns,” the message sent to Bloomberg read, according to NBC New York. “Anyone who wants to come to my house will get shot in the face. The right to bear arms is my constitutional God given right and I will exercise that right till the day I die.”

Richardson is currently at federal court in Texas awaiting arraignment.

Source: Variety (http://variety.com/2013/film/news/walking-dead-actress-arrested-in-ricin-letters-sent-to-obama-bloomberg-1200494141/)

"Walking Dead Actress" is a little misleading. Apparently she was a zombie extra once.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 07, 2013, 04:13:40 PM
http://gawker.com/walking-dead-zombie-husband-accusing-each-other-of-ric-510828918
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on June 16, 2013, 01:06:04 AM
So I just finished watching the entire 3 seasons - watched it all in about a month, which for a show like this makes a big difference as you get to see how the story evolves and the characters develop without forgetting the details from season to season.

SPOILERS

- As entertaining as this show is, and the plot of Woodbury vs. Prison worked well, I don't understand how the bigger picture isn't explored better. Did they give up looking for answers or for the possibility that there is something else out there? They've been in the same area for over a year now. The prison, Woodbury, the farm, their hometown is all very close together.

- Thanks for finally killing Andrea. What a terrible, stupid character. Talk about someone who doesn't learn, doesn't get it, doesn't evolve and constantly makes the wrong judgement. With all the Lost comparisons out there, makes me think they wanted to make her be their "Kate", but she sucks and she is not interesting at all.

- Speaking of Lost, I think exploring the history of the characters would have been a great element to explain how they react under these circumstances now. It's been three seasons and we don't know much about Glenn other than he used to deliver pizzas. We don't know much about Rick either. If there is anything Lost did very well, is highlight that the important experiences in your life make you who you are today and help you make decisions when you're put in shitty situations.

- I liked Season2 more than most people I guess. It still explored the basic elements of the show and how they had to adapt to this new world. It was all about survival from the walkers instead of some nutcase. Speaking of the nutcase, the Governor makes me think of the villain from a movie The Postman, and that is not a good thing.

- Shane was also the best character, even though they took him over the edge too quickly. The episode when he kills Otis was brilliant.

- Hope Season 4 goes back into trying to find some answers and maybe a new setting. Would love to see what is happening in the big cities. Or by the coast. I had heard that Darabont had ideas to make standalone episodes that explored other areas of the world. Would be cool if they actually did that. They had the farm, now the prison, we all know that shouldn't last or it would be boring as hell.


Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on July 23, 2013, 11:18:17 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSi2fJALDyQ

!!!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on September 16, 2013, 02:48:27 PM
Walking Dead’ spin-off series is officially in the works
by Dalton Ross | EW

AMC has announced that it is developing a companion series for The Walking Dead that is targeted to make it on air in 2015. Current Walking Dead executive producers Robert Kirkman (who also creatred the comic book on which the show is based), Gale Anne Hurd and David Alpert will also work on the new series.

“After 10 years of writing the comic book series and being so close to the debut of our fourth, and in my opinion, best season of the TV series, I couldn’t be more thrilled about getting the chance to create a new corner of The Walking Dead universe,” said Kirkman in an announcement by AMC, who will also produce the series.. “The opportunity to make a show that isn’t tethered by the events of the comic book, and is truly a blank page, has set my creativity racing.”

Charlie Collier, AMC’s president and general manager, added: “Building on the success of the most popular show on television for adults 18-49 is literally a no-brainer. We look forward to working with Robert, Gale and Dave again as we develop an entirely new story and cast of characters. It’s a big world and we can’t wait to give fans another unforgettable view of the zombie apocalypse.”

No word yet on if the series will feature any characters and events from the comic book or introduce completely new story lines, as Kirkman’s quote seems to suggest. The Walking Dead returns with season 4 on October 13.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on September 21, 2013, 04:27:53 AM
Charlie Collier, AMC’s president and general manager, added: “Building on the success of the most popular show on television for adults 18-49 is literally a no-brainer. We look forward to working with Robert, Gale and Dave again as we develop an entirely new story and cast of characters. It’s a big world and we can’t wait to give fans another unforgettable view of the zombie apocalypse.

Walking Dead: Miami... another TV franchise?

As for quality of the show, I will take season 2 over season 3 any day.

Some episodes of season 2 were placeholders (especially early ones), but at least ended with cliffhanger or moved narrative a bit. It got better in second part and we got nice buildup towards finale, which worked for me.

Season 3 is quite the opposite, started great and then second part dragged forever till weak finale. Placeholders were just awful: episode, were Rick finds his old pal was edited very badly (photo searching part had some serious issues - budget problems?).

Still I would say that season 2 had some boring parts, yet lowest parts weren't as bad as in season 3. Moreover highest point in season 2 was never reached by season 3. Overall story about farm was much more solid than prison story.

btw. I'm not big fan of TWD - dropped it after season 1 and picked it up again without any expectation, just to kill boredom. I probably could argue that it is the weakest series broadcasted by AMC (mind that I hate "The Killing").
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on October 15, 2013, 03:59:35 AM
'The Walking Dead' Season 4 Premiere is Highest Rated Episode Ever With 16.1 Million Viewers
via TV by the Numbers (http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/10/14/the-walking-dead-season-4-premiere-is-highest-rated-episode-ever-with-16-1-million-viewers-10-4-million-adults-18-49/208857/)

New York, NY – October 14, 2013 – AMC’s The Walking Dead returned last night for its fourth season, delivering the highest ratings of any episode in series history. The season four premiere was watched by 16.1 million total viewers and 10.4 million adults aged 18-49. Last night’s ratings confirm The Walking Dead continues to be the #1 show on all of television among the coveted 18-49 demographic. 2013/14 season to date, last night’s premiere ranks as the #1 telecast in adults 18-49, outperforming all programs including primetime NFL football. With time-shifted playback, last night’s premiere should exceed 20 million viewers.

“Sincere thanks to the fans, who have welcomed The Walking Dead back for its fourth season with the highest-rated episode in the show's history,” said AMC President Charlie Collier. “We could not be more proud of this show and everyone on both sides of the camera who work so hard to give life to this story of character, leadership and survival. It starts with series creator, writer and executive producer Robert Kirkman, show runner and executive producer Scott Gimple and the director of last night’s episode (and the man behind the make-up) executive producer Greg Nicotero, their fellow executive producers and an extraordinary cast and crew who are giving their all every day. So clearly, thanks to them, the dead have never been more alive.”

The previous record for an episode of The Walking Dead was 12.4 million total viewers and 8.1 million viewers 18-49 for the season three finale.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 17, 2013, 12:17:18 AM
It was a good episode. I feel like the actors from The Wire have reached critical mass in their distractingness, but maybe I'll get over that. Crazy lady was a bit predictable, and there was a little too much "be safe out there / don't go out there / I don't want to go out there" talk, but otherwise things are looking good.

The prison is surprisingly interesting now, which I did not expect. I still feel like they will need a change of scenery soon, but I guess the farm is helping. (Do they really go scavenging for hay?)

I loved the ceiling gag. Also loved Rick's 3 questions.

It looks like they may never return to the absurd level of bickering over nothing that almost swallowed up the first two seasons, and that is something I will continue to celebrate. Here's to another wonderfully dark season, with 100% less Andrea. Thank God.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on October 21, 2013, 01:16:40 PM

If I remember correctly, Last season's showrunner was fired midseason so this season would have a new showrunner. There's a couple of things I've noticed. The first being it is a hundred times gorier than it's ever been. The show now seems to go out of if it's way to show as much gore as possible.

I loved the ceiling gag.

I did too. The show never had memorable visuals but I'll remember the zombie hanging from the ceiling from it's intestines.

It's too early for me to think this and I could be proven wrong but there seems to be a shift in approach to the show. While ones could argue and would be correct about the short comings and failures of the show, the approach had always been in line with the new cable dramas. In this last episode, I got the impression that the approach to the show has shifted to the standard/generic cable drama like a Falling Skies. I hope I'm proven wrong.


Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on October 21, 2013, 06:26:09 PM
It's too early for me to think this and I could be proven wrong but there seems to be a shift in approach to the show. While ones could argue and would be correct about the short comings and failures of the show, the approach had always been in line with the new cable dramas. In this last episode, I got the impression that the approach to the show has shifted to the standard/generic cable drama like a Falling Skies. I hope I'm proven wrong.

You mean going into more episodic procedure? Long-term story arcs were never strong point of TWD. Every season so far was riddled with fillers - distribution of story was very uneven. Nothing new here.

Moreover it seems to me we will get another season with Big Bad Villain or two of them (rats seems like inside job and not dealings of Governor). More of old than anything, yet it is too soon to say for sure.

Here's to another wonderfully dark season, with 100% less Andrea. Thank God.

Two female roles were upgrade to main characters - there is still "hope" they will end up with something annoying.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 23, 2013, 12:35:13 AM
I'm pinching myself. This might be the most promising season. There's no cheese, no super annoying character, no drawn-out ridiculousness of any kind (so far). It's just a lot of delicious bleakness, which is working for me.

They've come a long way since Season 2, when everyone was bickering over absolutely nothing like eighth graders, and refused to work together in any way like a bunch of libertarian sociopaths. Now the characters actually behave like semi-rational human beings with actual motivations. Even Michonne has some complex emotional stuff bubbling to the surface, whatever that will turn out to be. And Carol is interesting... what?

I'm even starting to downgrade Season 3 by contrast. Maybe this is premature, and maybe I'm still handicapping the show, but I like where it's going.

It's definitely not a show I would ever binge watch, but a weekly dose of humorless post-apocalyptic frontier life is just about right.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on October 27, 2013, 05:32:25 PM
It's too early for me to think this and I could be proven wrong but there seems to be a shift in approach to the show. While ones could argue and would be correct about the short comings and failures of the show, the approach had always been in line with the new cable dramas. In this last episode, I got the impression that the approach to the show has shifted to the standard/generic cable drama like a Falling Skies. I hope I'm proven wrong.

You mean going into more episodic procedure? Long-term story arcs were never strong point of TWD. Every season so far was riddled with fillers - distribution of story was very uneven. Nothing new here.


The outcome/reasons behind the rats will determine a lot for me. Is someone in the prison feeding the zombies? If so, then TWD has dealt with people treating the zombies as alive multiple times. And will it come off as just a plot conflict the writers thought up and then forced a character's motivation into that action in an uninspired way. That's something they would do in a lesser show.

Also, I thought Cutty bringing flowers to find her dead wasn't in the right tone for the show. His demeanor was out of character. He's in a zombie apocalypse, there is a deadly disease sweeping the prison and he's on his way to visit his sick girlfriend yet he's acting like it's the happiest day of his life. I'm not expecting a lot of good things from all the focus on the kids.

Again, I could be proven wrong. The success or failure for me will depend on how they move forward with the rats.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on October 28, 2013, 06:48:40 PM
Lots of characters with death wish in this episode: Tyreese, Karen, Hershel. I could understand old man, not so much the rest (they didn't wait long to start acting irrational).

It looks like infection is meant to kill most of Woodbury survivors - cleaning after season 3 finale.

Car scene was kinda interesting - redneck and three black people. Will writers play with this?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 11, 2013, 10:23:37 PM
i watched it again, and i believe that last nights episode is one of the best, and definitely my favorite, of the series.
there was a lot going on there, but in a fluid way that wasnt distracting.
some amazing moments from several characters, and of course, the ending.
discuss! this season doesnt suck, this calls for discussion!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on November 12, 2013, 06:59:11 AM
SPOILERS.

4x04

Overall very lousy episode.

4x05

Hard to say anything negative about this episode. Can we get more of this on regular basis?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 12, 2013, 10:45:21 AM
hey you should SPOILIFY that second to last one mang
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on November 18, 2013, 10:02:49 AM
SPOILERS.

4x06

Necessary - this is most fitting word to describe episode I could think of. On prison side, story of Woodbury was contaminated by killing the most of baggage. Now it is time to clean up mess on the Governor side.

It was average, not much going on, it was mostly the setup for what will come. Looking at teasers for upcoming episode, I'm quite sure that some scenes will foreshadow future events: chess and the King.

Writers managed to squeeze some depth into character of the Governor. He is capable of doing good things without pretending - at least it seems so. Yet at the same time, he is still the same old liar. This could be interesting if played well.

It seems that next episode will be also centered around the Governor. This could give some breathing space to Team Rick as story telling goes.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 18, 2013, 05:20:18 PM
I'm all for the show branching the story out, I'm all for adding depth to the character of the Governor, and I'm all for slow-paced episodes full of dread and foreshadowing, so this episode was a massive victory all around for me.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 18, 2013, 05:36:31 PM
Yeah, it was one of the best of the season for sure. His intense glowering was a bit much sometimes, but otherwise I liked it. The paradox of the whole thing might have seemed nonsensical if it were poorly executed, but it came off like meaningful complexity. In season 2, I never would have believed this show could do that.

I thought the governor was going to deliver his new friends to the prison and disappear. That would have made sense to me. But they could do some very interesting things with the next episode. How much of his past can he hide from the family, now that it's confronting them? Does he stay good or does he snap? (He seemed to be enjoying some of that walker violence a little too much.)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on November 20, 2013, 05:15:53 PM
"Come at the king, you best not miss."

-Omar
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on November 27, 2013, 11:46:24 AM
I really enjoyed the past two episodes with the Governor. He's just a better actor, better character and more interesting than anyone at the prison.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 28, 2013, 11:43:50 PM
i appreciate his polarity in regards to rick much more in this season than the last, which i am unpopularly not a fan of. pretty intense episode, some nice dark shit going on. lets see if this season can continue to be not horrible.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on November 29, 2013, 06:25:14 AM
SPOILERS.

4x07

With every day passing I like this episode more. First of all, what a great opening - someone did nice work on inter-cutting this. Three minutes that ended up with "Your turn" and vibe was set for the whole episode - something interesting was bound to happen.

Writers fixed another character. In previous season, the Governor was mostly acting as Incompetent Evil with erratic behavior. I don't care if chess allegory was heavy handed - it worked for me, Brian is making questionable choices that are at the same time very weighted.

i appreciate his polarity in regards to rick much more in this season than the last, which i am unpopularly not a fan of.

Polarity - I think that whole episode was setup up around this. I like how writers are pulling tricks this season, The Dolgen brothers are clear example of that. Their story is mirrored by the way Rick and the Governor are leading. One is constantly battling with "right versus wrong" choices, other is doing the only thing without much remorse. This plot is also somehow parallel to the past of the Governor.

I don't mind to be tricked by writers (a chess game and the brothers) if it leads somewhere. Here they succeed: the Governor after this episode is a man to be reckoned with. Charisma and natural talent to organize people - I was unconvinced by him in the last season, that changed. Question what drives the Governor is relevant, because it is more than revenge and sadistic behavior right now.

I'm envious of the clash between two groups. I would like to see the tank fucking up Team Rick badly and where it goes from there.

edit: I almost forgot to mention the name of the episode: Dead Weight. I guess that writing room had a lot of fun playing with it. Love that name as it was used in a few different ways.

End of spoils.

This goes for highlighting the episode. I think this is the point, where we can try to summarize the season - after the next episode, series takes a break. Pretty much every aspect of the show seen some improvements so far: writing, acting (If material is there, actors can provide. Solid performances - I wouldn't use this to describe TWD few episodes back.), editing, cinematography and some inventive walkers.   
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 29, 2013, 06:40:50 AM
exactly. i'll expound on what i meant by polarity. i cant think of any better example than vince gilligans two seperate theories of brba: "Brian" is a good person with evil inside him, and his circumstances have whittled away the good around him to reveal it and make him The Governor. Rick is naturally a good person whose circumstances have led him to have to do evil things, and as a result he has suffered in the way that only a truly good hearted person would react.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on November 29, 2013, 07:42:04 AM
exactly. i'll expound on what i meant by polarity. i cant think of any better example than vince gilligans two seperate theories of brba: "Brian" is a good person with evil inside him, and his circumstances have whittled away the good around him to reveal it and make him The Governor. Rick is naturally a good person whose circumstances have led him to have to do evil things, and as a result he has suffered in the way that only a truly good hearted person would react.

I won't go that deep. How you adopt to environment, where moral constrains imposed by society and guarded by institutions are gone? There was a whole series built around this concept: Deadwood. Comparing Deadwood and The Walking Dead is pointless.

I treat differences between Rick and the Governor as mere device to construct sense of conflict. This was done in TWD before with Shane and to lesser degree with other characters. In this episode that was distilled to clear and condense substance. I don't expect TWD to explore a greater things - it is a wrong show. Zombie apocalypse with compelling characters is what I'm looking for and where TWD struggled very often. This season so far managed without obnoxious characters and some regulars did get polished.

btw. Spoilers. I'm the only one who found lesbian sub-plot a bit comic? This is another example of how much was squeezed into one episode (long are gone times of season two... hopefully).
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on December 02, 2013, 02:03:57 AM
I unreservedly endorse this episode. Easily among the best in the series.

I also feel like the show is starting to dip its toes in "serious television" waters. You could write a few essays about what just happened. It was actually a completely salient and unpretentious allegory of sorts that perfectly describes the folly of war. And that was a Walking Dead episode? Wow.

I'm also now entirely comfortable with the Governor's arc. It's still a bit unexpected how long the end was delayed, but now it really does feel like all of that story had to happen first. The structure is unconventional in a meaningful way.

I hope the two sisters join the prison expats. Seems like they were both set up for it. They would add some weight and complexity to the group. (The scared one probably arrives with Judith in her arms.)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 02, 2013, 12:29:38 PM
Quote
now it really does feel like all of that story had to happen first.

this sums up how i feel exactly. as some of you know, i'm one of the few people that hated season 3, but this episode could not have been possible without it. and it was perfect. hands down the best episode in the series.

it was borderline shakespearean. so many amazing little moments:

SPOILERS, WATCH THE EP IMMEDIATELY YOU!
-
-
- the bus leaving was one of the most realistic things i've seen in the series. that's how REAL PEOPLE would react in that situation. not screaming or chasing it or standing there dumbfounded, but like ok that just happened, fuck it, lets move.

- "because they aren't mine" did that give anyone else momentary chills?

- the governor made his transformation into brian and after last episode he's trying to combine the two with no success. he can't be evil the way he is inherently and keep nice people on his side the way he did in woodbury ever again and he sees that. he tries to be his own personal concept of reasonable by saying 'we just want to take it peacefully' and you can see that he feels like this is a huge favor he's doing, but herschell calls him out on it. fantastic scene.

- judith missing was pretty intense the same way the bus leaving was because they just accept it and keep moving. its kind of like someone said pages back, where tyrese's reaction to the bodies being burned wasn't logical because of how things are now, and everyone should be used to horrible shit. the discovery of the carseat and the bus leaving was the opposite of that and it was perfect. balancing stoicism and emotion because thats just how it is.

- i want to hear theories immediately about what's going on with the feeding rats and the drawn and quartered animal. i have no clue. i'm trying to make it d'angelo, or bob, wtf his name is, but that doesn't really compute too much. unless his alcoholism is some kind of hint to him being..crazy i guess?

- only thing i hated? stepping on that king toy thing with the eyepatch. that was just stupid and unnecessary. where did that even come from?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on December 02, 2013, 12:54:46 PM
Yup, I agree with all of that. Good stuff.

he can't be evil the way he is inherently and keep nice people on his side the way he did in woodbury ever again and he sees that.

Yeah. One episode ago he was this supposedly nice guy and now he's literally standing on a tank with captured hostages. Should be a red flag. It's a little sad how dumb most of those people were. They should have turned their guns on him immediately after hearing Rick's obviously sincere plea to peacefully take them in. There had not been enough indoctrination yet to make these people as blind as Woodbury's residents (who also had vastly more to lose and were thus more prone to delusion). But it's still realistic, because there are a lot of stupid people out there.

- i want to hear theories immediately about what's going on with the feeding rats and the drawn and quartered animal. i have no clue.

I'm guessing it's one of the kids. Maybe that girl, maybe even Carl, though that would be weird.

- only thing i hated? stepping on that king toy thing with the eyepatch. that was just stupid and unnecessary. where did that even come from?

It was a continuation of the chess metaphor from a previous episode. Remember when the girl drew the eyepatch on that chess piece? But yeah, a bit on the nose. It might have been advisable to abandon the chess thing while they were ahead.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 02, 2013, 02:04:48 PM
Quote
Remember when the girl drew the eyepatch on that chess piece?

wow i totally missed that somehow. duh. statement retracted.

i originally thought it was the young girl that was feeding the zombies because she liked them, but why show a progression of it with the dissected rabbit/rat thing now? they've treated it as kind of insignificant off and on after the initial discovery of the rats by the fence. it seems like something deeper than that which will be tied up in february. iono.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on December 02, 2013, 03:35:51 PM
I keep coming back to the scene where the one girl said to Carol "she's not weak, she's just messed up". I'm convinced the girl killed and burned those bodies and Carol covered for her.

The finale had some balls but was still a little brainless in some aspects. "Sure honey, play way over there in the mud for no reason, I'll just sit up here in silence and not look at you."  I was also a little confused as to why the Governor was suddenly fighting Rick hand to hand even though he had a gun and all of his friends with guns walked right by the bus Rick was hiding behind.  It was at least exciting, which is all I ever really wanted this show to be. Never mind that Daryl could have thrown the grenade from where he was instead of using decaying flesh as a bulletproof shield to throw it ten feet closer.

I did love the long shot of the walker slowly emerging from the trees across the river. This show really nails the production side of things sometimes, I think that's why I keep coming back.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 02, 2013, 04:13:54 PM
yes. this is what i wanted. lets get some discussion going.

the carol covering thing makes PERFECT sense now. i love it. rewatching the part where rick takes carol on the trip, it really does add up.

regarding the governor using his fists, i noticed the gun thing too, and i immediately recognized it as just being personal. he just wants to hurt him in an intimate because he's compiling everything that has gone wrong into being ricks fault. which is awesome when you set it next to rick completely absolving himself of responsibility when he mentions the council.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Tictacbk on December 03, 2013, 06:14:10 PM
I've got a lot of problems with The Walking Dead.  I find the only way to enjoy the show is to constantly make up excuses for it.  But all the illogical decision-making and contrived storytelling aside (and they are getting better about that), I think my largest complaint is that the show is almost entirely devoid of humor. I get that the world they're living in is a bleak one, but so is drug-riddled Baltimore.  Hell, The Wire is probably the most cynical show there is, but it still managed to be hilarious, and often.  Same goes for the Sopranos.  You can have the best parts of your show be the deaths and defeats, but those can't be the only good parts, or else it just gets tired.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on December 03, 2013, 07:11:08 PM
I think my largest complaint is that the show is almost entirely devoid of humor.

I agree...

It's definitely not a show I would ever binge watch, but a weekly dose of humorless post-apocalyptic frontier life is just about right.

The lack of humor anywhere really is astonishing. I think they tried something a few weeks ago where Michonne was joking with Darryl or something... it translated as something that was perhaps funny to them but definitely not to us. Herschel has had a few gentle old man wisecracks of a similar nature. All other humor in the show, I think, has been unintentional. Perhaps it's too bad that the unintentional humor is drying up, because over the course of the series the sheer volume of it has sort of made up for the lack of intentional humor.

On that topic... I just realized T-Dog is exactly like Chris from Homeland. Quiet, dependable, stoic, doesn't cause drama, presumably takes care of business, gets fewer and fewer lines until he inevitably fades into the scenery. I guess we'll know Chris's brutal death is imminent when he gets a full episode of character-building.



(http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/walking-dead-meme-whats-your-name-again.jpg)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on December 03, 2013, 07:46:11 PM
AH, HELL NAW!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 03, 2013, 10:53:46 PM
haha, i was just about to defend this by listing my favorite comedic moments of the show and realized they were ALL UNINTENTIONAL.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on January 17, 2014, 08:40:13 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCNFEmUK5PY
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on January 21, 2014, 08:36:29 PM
"I see a bad moon a-risin'..."

and a modicum of character development if any
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on February 10, 2014, 09:50:33 PM
Has anyone seen last nights episode?

SPOILERS OF COURSE

Pretty great comeback. I like it when they focus on a couple of characters instead of trying to show what everyone is doing at once. This show is amazing at building suspense. It's great to see Carl growing up and having some balls. The scene with Rick coming 'back to life' was pretty fucking awesome.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 10, 2014, 11:32:41 PM
NOTHING BUT SPOILERS
-
-
-
good god damn. this season is definitely reminding us why we bother.
bullet points.

- the technical quality of this episode is shown perfectly through the Carl scenes because he is a terrible actor yet it doesnt take away from his contribution to it and the episode in general. they were really great. his outburst at passed out rick was so cheesy and awful but it still fit somehow, and i almost forgot about it after he signs the door and eats the pudding. that was just awesome, it was like a stephen king b movie where you just cheer for the triumphant little kid who's got problems.

- the final scene was fucking brilliant. i literally teared up a little bit at michonne's reaction. and then rick's final line made me want to applaud.

- so are we to take away from michonne and the black chick that's someone she knows? or her constantly remembering people from the past just makes her go apeshit?

- did anyone else find the dream scene unnecessarily confusing? i dont know how much of it was actually fantasy, i always hoped she and her life was pretty ghetto before everything happened. those dudes went from acting super white to super weird and awkward.

- michonne and carl both talk to people through themselves in this episode. wonder if that was intentional, because those were definitely the weakest parts of this episode.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: N on February 10, 2014, 11:35:44 PM
The closeup leading Carl looks kinda good, I might try get back into it.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on February 17, 2014, 12:39:09 PM
4x10 SPOILERS

And again it is mixed bag. On one hand splitting the group works for the show - so we can get some rest from leadership problems and communal decision making. Shuffling was used to advantage - some interesting pairs there. On other hand some story advancements are very rough. Before I will describe that, I want to talk about most scary/funny scene so far in the series.

Choking of a baby. I couldn't hold myself with this close-up, maybe with different setup, my reaction would be different. I was laughing, because whole deal felt very cheesy and I was thinking about young parents freaking up, while watching this scene.

Now the bad. Tyreese and girls are example of some choppy writing. Carol just shows up from nowhere and dying man provides last line, which will direct narrative - how convenient. Maggie and bus - that scene didn't convince me either. I don't think show has enough guts to kill Glenn off-screen. End of rant.

Now we are sure that there is something very wrong/disturbing with the girl. I have hopes for what will come.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on February 17, 2014, 04:55:42 PM
I thought the Tyreese/girls segment was the best of the episode, or at least the only one that approached true horror. The concept of dealing with a baby in the zombie apocalypse isn't something the show has explored very much. Psycho girl smothering the baby should've felt less ridiculous, but I think it's obvious now that Carol took the fall for her and she murdered and burned those bodies at the prison.

Glenn looked like a Ninja Turtle.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 17, 2014, 11:25:55 PM
Wow, Carl and blonde girl really can't act, can they?

I thought I knew how bad blonde girl was, but her absolute failure in this episode basically smeared excrement across what might have been a compelling opener. It played like parody. I mean really, they had her reading from her journal as narration. If you're going to do that to an actor, why her? Are the writers trying to get her fired? You could absolutely feel her struggling with each acting choice as she botched each line... it was excruciating. Things didn't improve when she started talking in real time. The "I'll go tracking by myself!" scene where she ran off in a huff transported me directly back to a high school auditorium watching an actor who's not quite sure how to move or what to do with their body, delivering lines as if they're reading off a page.

Carl was slightly better, but still clearly learning how to act. But given the cookie-cutter surly teen content he was working with, my instinct is to blame the writers, because Carl has not been this bad in the past. And he can competently eat a can of pudding. (Why didn't he take the lid all the way off? That really bothered me. It was this awkward metal disc dominating the scene.)

To paraphrase June Diane Raphael, performances like these make you realize that acting is actually really hard.

And then, Glen and Maggie delivered some of the best acting the show has ever seen. Glen in particular. Maybe they were benefitting from contrast, but it certainly seemed masterful to me.

Other things:

Is blonde girl going to be Darryl's love interest now? She seems to be melting through his rough exterior a little bit (he pointedly stopped when she was crying attempting to cry), and they gave Darryl a save the cat moment (giving her the hat to put the fruit in). Also, when she told Darryl "we should do something!" I seriously thought she was propositioning him and/or that I had misheard the line. I don't remember seeing Darryl raise an eyebrow, but it seems like she was at least testing the waters. She was probably going for the double meaning.

Was psycho girl trying to smother the baby, or did she not understand that she only needed to cover the mouth, or is that supposed to be ambiguous? And did Carol see her doing this?

I'm very happy that the ex-police officer or whatever escaped with Glen. Her character has a lot of potential and is actually delivering a lot already.

Michonne's dream sequence was the best thing about these two episodes, definitely one of the top 3 scenes this season so far. I loved it. I was giddy all the way through, like... wait, what show am I watching right now?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 24, 2014, 09:57:56 PM
spoilers but not really



what an annoying fucking show.
the first episode with michonne and rick and carl was awesome. like beautifully cinematic and compelling and stuff. it was so awesome, that carls horrible acting was super forgivable. i mean jesus. the only thing cool with last episode was some partial moments or even seconds of rick.  but the dialogue was unforgivable. these two new guys are all SyFy channel "i have the new cure im smarter than you meh!". and the guy smiling killing walkers? who gives a shit, yall did that with shane kind of, and way too much with governor. carl and michonnes dialogue in this episode was fucking ridiculous. this show is bordering homeland inconsistency.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on February 25, 2014, 05:00:16 AM
this show is bordering homeland inconsistency.

This defines TWD very well, especially since writing in TV is a marathon, not a sprint.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 26, 2014, 12:40:41 AM
Eh, I thought this episode was enjoyable. Carl's acting in the beginning was shockingly bad (how many takes to get that?), but I didn't mind the rest of it. The new characters have potential, even (or especially?) the goofy ones.

Rick's scenes were just great. Absolutely love that kind of content in this show.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 03, 2014, 03:00:06 PM
This was my favorite episode of the season so far. I think I would be perfectly happy if they abandoned the concept of narrative momentum entirely and just made the show entirely about character development. I can barely give a shit about whatever's at this Terminus place, or Abraham's mission to transport the idiot scientist to DC, but I was completely invested in Beth's quest to find her first alcoholic drink. I was ecstatically happy at the smile on her face when she told Daryl they should burn the shack down. I felt more of a fulfilling sense of dramatic closure when they did so than at any point in the series so far.

Side note, I can't be the only one who spent the entire porch scene hoping Beth and Daryl ended up fucking.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on March 03, 2014, 03:50:14 PM
4x12 Spoilers

This was my favorite episode of the season so far. I think I would be perfectly happy if they abandoned the concept of narrative momentum entirely and just made the show entirely about character development. I can barely give a shit about whatever's at this Terminus place, or Abraham's mission to transport the idiot scientist to DC, but I was completely invested in Beth's quest to find her first alcoholic drink. I was ecstatically happy at the smile on her face when she told Daryl they should burn the shack down. I felt more of a fulfilling sense of dramatic closure when they did so than at any point in the series so far.

It isn't my favorite, but I agree with pretty much the rest. TWD can win small battles and that is far more rewarding than long arcs so far. Booze trip sounded cheesy at first, but it did pay off. I like also what they are doing with openings, which was great in this episode.

Quote
Side note, I can't be the only one who spent the entire porch scene hoping Beth and Daryl ended up fucking.

You're not alone there. I was expecting sex related question to pop in the game, they were playing earlier.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on March 04, 2014, 12:35:57 PM
I thought it was one of the worst episodes of the series. Pretty bad acting and dialogue. And it would be better if the story moved forward in some way. It seems like they don't know where exactly they want to take things.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 04, 2014, 12:54:35 PM
Fuck the story.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on March 04, 2014, 01:43:32 PM
Pretty bad acting and dialogue.

This was never strong point of the series. I will give a chance to the other approach. We have been hearing "we need to stay together" for 3 seasons straight. Now instead of talking about it, they are showing us what happens, when they don't stay together. At least this gives a bit of breathing space. Group dynamic was bit tiresome and thanks to split you need very little to make potentially every encounter with walkers or other people deadly - Rick hiding under the bed is a good example.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 04, 2014, 03:57:21 PM
I think this episode would've registered better for me if Beth wasn't the worst actress in the universe. Even still, I like this version of the show better than the boring slog that was the prison. I like stumbling onto a new set every week, there were some inspired ideas in that Country Club (Rich Bitch mannequin was some macabre shit). The show seems to have a sliding scale of quality related to the number of protagonists it has on screen. It's best when focused on one person (Rick under the bed, Carl in the other house), still pretty good with two or three (Tyreese with the girls, Rick and Hershel in the bar in Season 2, Rick and Carol last season) and downright dreadful with the ensemble (Most of the prison, every scene at Woodbury, group debates at Hershel's farm). To break it down, the less the characters talk, the more engaged I am with the show. Everything is so well realized in regards to set design and makeup. When characters argue loudly or do other stupid things to progress the plot, it's like a child jumping up and down and screaming in front of a nice painting.

I like that neither Beth nor Daryl remembered what a pain in the ass it is to start a fire.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on March 04, 2014, 04:14:55 PM
To break it down, the less the characters talk, the more engaged I am with the show.

I concur, again Rick under the bed is good example of that. Show definitely has production values from technical standpoint. If action is driven in procedural way it works: doing one task at the time in order to survive, just moving from A to B in focused manner without blabber.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 17, 2014, 06:03:33 AM
....sweet

jesus


this show sucks sometimes, but when its good, it's damn good.
maybe in top 5 best episodes of the series. what you guys think
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 17, 2014, 10:17:00 AM
Where it ended up was pretty incredible, but how it got there was kind of sloppy.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on March 17, 2014, 01:46:56 PM
I really liked the opening teaser. I don't know why the show doesn't have more memorable visuals. I thought it was a flashback of a girl playing in the yard. It was such a great reveal when you realize it's a girl playing in the yard with a zombie. Perfect set up for the episode.

The rest of the episode was poorly directed. It was sloppy. I looked it up and the director of this episode hadn't directed anything prior to this episode. 

It was still an intense episode. It got darker than I thought the show ever would. The direction just held it back from being really great.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 17, 2014, 03:59:13 PM
i actually didn't have a problem with the direction at all on the second viewing.
probaly the best opening teaser of the series. incredibly memorable and haunting.

carol's best performance of the show. she truly is a great character and actress.
the bad direction i think comes from tyrese, and the girls:
i'm going to overlook tyrese, he's kind of inexcusably annoying. his kindhearted big lug demeanor just bores me at times. but the girls in this episode who are notoriously shitty actors, were still shitty but in this instance i think it helped their characters.

the little one is super dumb and innocent and she displays that unintentionally through her shitty acting.
the older one is just fucking crazy, and in this episode i think her shitty acting made her seem crazy to the point of being really scary.

maybe thats a weak defense, but i thought that this episode was perfect.

EDIT SPOILERS SPOILERS
-
-
correction: this episode would've been perfect if she killed judith, too. why go there and not go all the way?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 19, 2014, 01:08:44 PM
(spoilers for this ep)

I think that was some of the loudest foreshadowing I've ever experienced.

Carol:
"Sometimes you have to make difficult choices."
"When the time comes, you'll have to do what it takes to survive."
"You have to be prepared to do horrible things sometimes."
"In this world, you're confronted with ugly decisions."
"One day, to survive, you'll have to do something horrible."
"I'm going to have to put your sister down."

I liked the episode, though. Totally agree with 03 that psycho girl's craziness was enhanced by her less-than-perfect acting. She and her sister are still better actors than alcoholic girl.

But yeah, Carol was obviously the highlight. If there was a performance better than that in this show I think it would break the fourth wall. Tyrese was great too, and their characters are surprisingly good. Glenn, Maggie, Carol, and Tyrese are holding the show together right now, and I love watching all of them. Carl and Beth can fall in a pit of zombies. (Beth in a drunken stupor, Carl chasing after a butterfly or something. Natural selection.)

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 24, 2014, 12:00:26 AM
spoilers. s04e15 stream of consciousness bullet point review:

- sign reveal was surprisingly emotional.
- darryl and the dude in the woods scene makes no sense whatsoever as far as dialogue and human reactions. 'the rules don't apply out here' and then suddenly 'those are the rules.'? wtf?
- kris kristofferson ripoff old dude, his cigarettes emit smoke but his mouth does not.
- mullet doctor is a useless and unfunny character, if his story goes anywhere, i might the retract the former.
- train tunnel was fucking great. the light through the body shot? nice. glen is definitely one the few that has gotten serious benefit from quality character development.
- windshield message was fantastic but way too short, this show has some really amazing shots sometimes. especially this season.
- terminus looks amazing, but im kind of confused about the gates opening at the slightest touch?

overall great episode, just way too much going on.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 26, 2014, 12:40:14 AM
Spoilers.

Thoroughly enjoyable episode. I even got caught up in the emotion of the Maggie/Glenn content.

The Michonne/Carl scene seemed a little bit cynically forced. It's another moment where humor is attempted, but it's not an actual joke and it's only funny to the characters in the scene. I'm not sure if Rick's reaction is meant to cue us to chuckle, or if our hearts are simply meant to be warmed.

In any case, I think it actually worked. This is what I was ranting about in Season 2; it was absurdly unrealistic how no one was forming a bond, even under circumstances where humans instinctively force themselves to form bonds. This season, it's finally happening all over the place, and things feel more real.

So the Terminus people are cannibals, right? Why else would they actively try to lead everyone there? And that was an awfully big grill.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on April 01, 2014, 01:36:46 AM
let me know when you guys are ready to talk about the finale, because nothing i have to say is not spoilerful.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Pubrick on April 01, 2014, 03:32:16 AM
Just post it, I like reading the constant disappointment in this thread.

It lets me believe for a moment that I have made the right life choices.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 01, 2014, 11:26:31 AM
Nah, this season was actually really fun. Pretty much everything that was wrong about the early stuff has been corrected. Even Rick's accent! The only annoying bits left are... well... there's actually not much. (Even Carl is tolerable right now.) There's Beth. But she's in a trunk somewhere.

The show is still fun to criticize, but it's also just fun, despite its gloom somehow.

SPOILERS

I'm interested to know what you disliked about the finale, 03. I quite enjoyed it. There were at least two amazing scenes that are still staying with me: epic neckbite scene and the scene where Rick notices his friend's belongings being worn by the strangers. (I immediately rewatched both of those scenes.) Directed by Michelle MacLaren, by the way.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on April 01, 2014, 11:53:10 AM
SPOILERS

I enjoyed the finale.

Carl takes after Lori. I should be annoyed with Carl's reaction to Rick. Last season, the kid killed a guy while he was surrendering his gun and now he has an aversion to violence. The reason it doesn't bother me is cause it has nothing to do with Carl. Everything in this episode was about Rick. They needed a reaction to Rick's change. Also, as JB stated Carl is no where as annoying as he used to be.

I really hope they continue with Rick going down this path. I want to see him turn into the governor.

They wasted a lot of bullets just to trap them by the train. I'm sure that was Michelle MacLaren idea. I remember the BB podcast for episode To'hajiilee. They joked Maclaren added the shoot out at the end of the episode. In the BB doc she was upset that she didn't get to film the shoot out in the Buried episode.

The production design in the memorial was horrible. It looked liked a 3rd grade version of a satanic ritual.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on April 01, 2014, 01:51:56 PM
SPOILERS

i liked the episode a LOT. my problems with it stem from there not being enough of it.
the flashbacks were nice and i understood there purpose, but i would have gladly traded the foreshadowing for more information.

it felt like a mid season finale. this seasons mid season finale had more closure to it than this episode did.
we spend all this time getting to terminus, and the big reveal about who they really are isn't going to be seen until the next season?!?

so that means that the trailer for season 5 is going to reveal all the shit we don't know about terminus that would have been much more dramatic if we ended season 4 with it. i mean, who else wanted to see them walk into that train car and see glen and maggies body being prepared for food? that would have been CRAZY. this ending was simply them setting up another woodbury, which i do not want to see again. i want to know what they are and why.
terminus is genuinely interesting. im guessing that lady was sending out radio broadcasts?

and it would have been better if tyrese and carol were also in that car, because then it would have been 'everyone is fucked' as opposed to 'well they're probaly going to come and have a hand in saving them'. and ricks last line was stupid, it was like bruce willis putting on his shades and going 'here we go again, fellas'.

the whole neckbite scene was amazing! the fat guy trying to rape carl was great because i dont think the show has really gone 'there' before. and rick going into monster mode was insanely satisfying.
overall it was a great episode, i just dont like cliffhangers that could have been more emotionally effective if they added just a bit more information.

also, i found this pretty interesting:

"In Roman religion, Terminus was the god who protected boundary markers; his name was the Latin word for such a marker. Sacrifices were performed to sanctify each boundary stone, and landowners celebrated a festival called the "Terminalia" in Terminus' honor each year on February 23. The Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline Hill was thought to have been built over a shrine to Terminus, and he was occasionally identified as an aspect of Jupiter under the name "Jupiter Terminalis".

Ancient writers believed that the worship of Terminus had been introduced to Rome during the reign of the first king Romulus (traditionally 753–717 BC) or his successor Numa (717–673 BC). Modern scholars have variously seen it as the survival of an early animistic reverence for the power inherent in the boundary marker, or as the Roman development of proto-Indo-European belief in a god concerned with the division of property.

The name of the god Terminus was the Latin word for a boundary stone,[1] and his worship as recorded in the late Republic and Empire centred on this stone, with which the god could be identified.[2] Siculus Flaccus, a writer on land surveying, records the ritual by which the stone was sanctified: the bones, ashes, and blood of a sacrificial victim, along with crops, honeycombs, and wine, were placed into a hole at a point where estates converged, and the stone was driven in on top"

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on April 03, 2014, 11:10:52 PM
I laughed out loud when I saw that guy casually wearing Glen's riot gear, Terminus folks aren't too bright. Also got a kick out of Rick approaching from the woods just to be cautious, then busting in blindly anyway.

Jeremy's right, the show is still fun, even when it sucks. I feel like any time I'm watching a zombie film, I'll talk shit to the screen and make fun of it, even though I'm actively enjoying myself. Rick mugging to the camera and saying "They screwed with the wrong people" as the camera does the world's cheesiest zoom was so deliciously bad, I couldn't help smiling.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: MacGuffin on April 04, 2014, 01:05:57 AM
'Walking Dead': Revisiting the Final Scene
Source: THR

[Warning: Spoilers ahead for the season finale of The Walking Dead.]

As someone who hasn't read the Walking Dead comic books -- just as I haven’t read George R.R. Martin’s books that form the basis for Game of Thrones -- I take in all the information simply as it’s doled out, without being privy to older nonshow references or working with the knowledge of what’s ahead.

But I didn’t want the finale and the group’s trek to Terminus and what that foreshadowed to slip away (the onslaught of Game of Thrones, Mad Men, Fargo and others is near) before revisiting it. When first introduced to Terminus -- at the end of a journey the season was leading viewers along -- I got the distinct feeling (as others did, or at least should have), that Terminus is no sanctuary. Rather, hints abounded that a modern-day Soylent Green story was unfolding.

And though it’s pretty clear there’s cannibalism going on at Terminus, the producers are being coy about it.

In the episode where Glenn and Maggie, etc., walked into the welcoming arms of Terminus, red flags were everywhere. The people at Terminus had an awful lot of meat, first of all. The grill -- with its willing grill-master -- was always framed prominently and was the first stop to gaining interior access to Terminus. Just by positioning it right there in the open, out front, the Walking Dead brain trust was making the grill and all that might conjure, a significant visual element. Then it was,  "Hey, grab a plate, have yourself a meal. You’re welcome here." But was that meat from unseen calves or pigs -- or was that Beth, or others?

Of course Terminus seemed pretty desolate for a major destination meet-up for wandering survivors. The “Those Who Arrive Survive” signage would certainly indicate more people should be hanging around -- unless those people are surviving in spirit, as sustenance. And the Terminus explanation of why in the hell anyone would be so generous, letting in hordes of freeloaders -- “the more people become part of us, we get stronger” was certainly a big hint.

With a plethora of clues turning up, the one that probably sealed it was the quick shot (but not too quick) of what looked like the stripped carcasses of humans (and later an altar room to remember them for their sacrifice).

I’m fine with the cannibal notion -- it’s not revolutionary for the zombie genre and all through the series I've been wondering when the hungry hordes of survivors would finally go Hannibal on the weaker of their number. In the finale, so much portent about hunger and trapping was afoot. But I don’t think it was overkill -- the writers rather adeptly handled the storyline of Rick showing Carl how to trap a rabbit with the Terminus parallel hanging over it like a noose. Our group of plucky core members were being led, just like the rabbit, down a chute to their own demise.

Whereas my most nagging thought after the finale was how the hell Rick and company would get out of the cattle car and overtake a larger group of vastly better-armed adversaries, the actual scene that stuck in my head was the last five minutes of herding.

That was impressively done -- and made up for the literal last shot of Rick announcing revenge in an all-too-pat blockbuster movie kind of way.

In the scene, as the snipers are shooting at the feet of Rick and Daryl, etc., my initial reaction was a slight groan about the poor marksmanship so prevalent on TV and in movies -- but it then  becomes clear that the shooters are missing on purpose. They're not trying to kill, they're trying to herd. It was the start of something that became really something to behold, not only for the execution itself but for the level of detail and research that went into it.

Alternatively shot from above -- emphasizing power and giving viewers a long shot of the railroad/cattle car at the top of the frame and the futility of Rick, Daryl, Michonne and Carl in the foreground -- we then got the crowning elements. Gareth, the leader of Terminus, is going to walk them to slaughter (though it’s important to remember this is all implied -- the finale made no hard nod toward cannibalism). Still, the scene all but seals it. If you research how cattle are killed, the optimum approach is to have them take a series of corner turns before getting close -- if they see they’re being led to slaughter, chaos ensues. The camera follows Rick and company in a circular route through Terminus until they get out into the clearing.

Cattle are also, as they near slaughter, guided in single file -- something Gareth did meticulously with each character, leading them to the railroad/cattle car in the short distance. There is also a “correct handler position for driving cattle” -- and director Michelle MacLaren set up the final scene by positioning Gareth in a perfect, textbook handler position.

She also created maximum tension by showing the distance between Carl, the last of the group to be herded toward the rail car, and Rick. The panic that arose on Rick’s face as Gareth forced him to be first while keeping Carl behind in a vulnerable position, was captured superbly by MacLaren. Proper handling procedures also indicate that calves go last (or, if you will, parents go first -- reversing it causes panic and a chance the cattle will disperse). And lastly, what the scene captured in a kind of haunting by-the-book approach, is that cattle go forward in a single-file line but shouldn’t actually see livestock in front of them -- which is why Glenn and Maggie and the others were shunted to the rear of the car.

All of that was both chillingly calculated and beautifully constructed (and the powdered milk containers -- clearly being used to fatten everybody up -- were a nice touch). I may have wished for a more dramatic cliff-hanger (a shoot-out, or perhaps reinforcements to use those guns Rick buried), but I did, especially on further inspection, appreciate the artistry in the construction of that finale scene.

Now all that’s left to find out when season five begins is who gets slaughtered -- or maybe who already has been slaughtered (and grilled).
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on April 04, 2014, 02:20:00 PM
So I guess the people of Terminus resorted to cannibalism almost immediately after the zombies showed up? There still seems to be plenty of food everywhere, even now.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on April 04, 2014, 03:14:13 PM
True, it does seem like you can still hunt animals, plant fruits, find supplies of other sorts around. Deciding to become a cannibal and building a whole system around it, including a marketing campaign to attract new victims, it seems very elaborate and crazy.

Do we know how long it's been since the zombie breakout began?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on April 04, 2014, 03:57:58 PM
Michelle MacLaren directed this, eh?
No wonder it didn't suck
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on April 12, 2014, 11:53:46 AM
Lengthy interview with Scott Wilson:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5e3U2DIOHg

Some highlights: Fake head, going with six-shooter after tank, taking a lot out of playing in TV series, missing the show, holding on plot twits, about liking own character, collaborating with writer/directors, looking good enough for the role, almost constantly shooting with 3-camera setup.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on July 25, 2014, 03:25:03 PM
man you guys are slacking. no one's even mentioned this yet?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4GAs9TJVjM

looks entertaining and that's about it.
what a repetitive trailer.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on July 25, 2014, 04:40:20 PM
That looks pretty top notch, actually. This show has so much potential now.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on July 25, 2014, 04:44:52 PM
i agree, its just the constant "i don't trust them" "we have to stick together" in that trailer that irked me a little bit.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on July 25, 2014, 05:04:07 PM
Totally fair point. I think that stuff just blows past me now; it's like the static in the signal.

We have to stick together!
In the zombie apocalypse, the real danger is other humans!
You must sacrifice some of your own humanity to survive!
Caarrrl!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on July 26, 2014, 12:25:22 AM
Damnit I wish I hadn't watch that. Even though they can do it in so many different ways, there are still significant spoilers from end of last season.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on July 28, 2014, 09:07:23 PM
i agree, its just the constant "i don't trust them" "we have to stick together" in that trailer that irked me a little bit.

They also like to throw that word "Washington" around a lot...we get it guys! You have to get to Washington!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 13, 2014, 12:52:34 PM
i know most of you have given up on this show. but did anyone see the premiere last night?
i was shockingly impressed and terrified. easily the most violent episode of the series. some serious tear jerking moments and equally skin crawling horror. must watch.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 13, 2014, 06:43:57 PM
I definitely haven't given up on the show. It's in top form. Almost incomprehensibly better than the show it once was. When last night's episode ended, I wanted to immediately rewatch it. They've really figured out how to pick up the pace (a painful lesson learned from Hershel's farm) and pack a lot of awesomeness into one episode. It almost had the characteristics of a season finale. And I think the show's real genre strength is action, not horror or anything else.

SPOILERS

Some other thoughts:

- Yup, the emotional parts absolutely worked for me. Kind of caught me off guard.
- Carol is definitely one of the best characters.
- The bleeding out scene didn't quite have the intended amount of tension, once we saw that our people were last in line to be cut. Breaking Bad kind of spoiled us on throat-slitting anyway. (It was still horrifying though.)
- I hope Beth stays in that trunk. I don't see what value she would add to the show right now.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Fernando on October 13, 2014, 10:49:54 PM
yes, great episode and definitely one of the best episodes involving all the main characters, last season the ones that where the focus on just one party were the best.

SPOILS

- am I the only one that thinks the guy that was beaten by Tyreese is alive?
- Carl still doesn't work for me (ok, he didint do shit on this one but still), although last season he had a couple of great moments with Michonne.
- the creep that wanted to waste D (from the wire, cant remember his name) was alive when they left Terminus along with other two or three ppl, I'm sure that at some point they will clash again.


agree with JB that action suits best this show, I'd only add that action with a sense of dread is when it works best.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 13, 2014, 11:11:01 PM
I don't think it's possible to overestimate the positive impact Scott Gimple taking over running the show has had on the quality of the product. He understands how to focus on the emotional impact of events in a way the show used to be terrible at. I'm not going to type out the spoiler, but the ultimate revelation of the Terminus groups' motivation was truly chilling. In that one moment of understanding their mindset, they became more terrifying than the Governor ever was in his entire run on the series.

And yeah, Carol. Holy crap. Most improved character/actor in television history?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on October 14, 2014, 06:48:50 PM
my review:

"hmmm...let's have our main characters run into some mustache-twirlingly evil group whom they cannot trust and then the day will be saved when the undead attack and ONLY eat the bad guys!!!!"
~ quote from Walking Dead writers' room, more than once per season I'm sure


yeah, that's getting to be a bit old. otherwise i'm glad to see someone who understands characters in a way that makes it palpably emotional when we see them reunited. and I also like seeing Chad Coleman beat up the reporter dude from "Treme".  Show's still a bit weak, seems kind of too in love with itself, but it definitely had episodes in the past two seasons that were solid, so I'll give it a go for those chestnuts.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 20, 2014, 04:04:40 PM
spoilers s05e02




pretty amazing episode, but i am confused about a few things i want you guys to help me with:

- why the fuck did bob just walk off like that?

- how does the guy that tyreese beat up not look like he was almost beat to death?

- i'm pretty sure this will be cleared up soon, but what is the deal with the preacher? how can he survive like that without any weapons? how is that church not torn to pieces?

- jesus christ that ending was scarring. so will bob be the new one legged character? i was wondering why they kept him alive, and freaked myself out when i thought of the concept that they're just going to keep him alive because they can't store his meat, and will probaly end up feeding him his own body as they eat him piece by piece. good job walking dead, you are officially disturbing as fuck.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 20, 2014, 04:11:21 PM
SPOILERS

Bob got bit in the community center by the underwater walker. Pretty sure he was wandering off to go kill himself before he turned.

If you look at the shot of his severed foot in the fire, you can see bite marks on the ankle. The cannibals just inadvertently saved his life by chopping his leg off.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 20, 2014, 05:47:42 PM
WHOA thank you. totally did not see that. very apparent on rewatch.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 20, 2014, 05:55:17 PM
SPOILERS

Yeah I'm not sure about the preacher. My first guess is that he locked people out of the church (I guess that's self-evident) or locked them in the food bank or both. Some kind of murder through inaction/fear seems most likely for his character.

I think he probably has been lucky too, in that thugs have not taken over the church. Maybe it has really good doors. (It was locked when they arrived.)

Side note: I thought the show had already reached its saturation point of actors from The Wire, but apparently not. I expect Ziggy to appear next week.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 20, 2014, 05:57:16 PM
also, the walking dead: the wire retirement home
edit: damn we modified at the exact same time lol
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 20, 2014, 05:58:50 PM
I just edited in a comment about that. You sniped me. :doh:
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on October 21, 2014, 03:22:56 PM
Looks promising so far. Writing room isn't fighting against deficiencies of previous season and they planted enough ahead of time to have arcs to burn in future.

I didn't lost my interest in the show, just "The Knick" took my attention before.   
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on October 22, 2014, 05:55:15 AM
SPOILERS SEASON 5 Ep 02


- how does the guy that tyreese beat up not look like he was almost beat to death?


I didn't notice him being there. If you're referring to the guy talking to Bob, that was the guy who was in charge of Throat-Slitting 101, not Mr. Fireworks.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 22, 2014, 07:57:17 AM
uh no dude, i'm talking about martin(?) not gareth. watch again right in the middle of the first blurry fire vision, he's seen very obviously eating standing around, he looks like he has a black eye kind of, but that's about it.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Fernando on October 22, 2014, 12:42:24 PM
I told you guys Cutty didn't kill him! (coincidentally that guy is another David Simon alumni TWD hires, from Treme)

also my other prediction looks promising:

SPOILS

- am I the only one that thinks the guy that was beaten by Tyreese is alive?
- the creep that wanted to waste D (from the wire, cant remember his name) was alive when they left Terminus along with other two or three ppl, I'm sure that at some point they will clash again.


Just one observation, do those terminus guys have drugs or something? because if you cut a guy's leg while being k.o. doesn't seem enough to not wake up from the pain...or maybe I don't know shit about that.

can't wait for those terminus creeps to be terminated   :yabbse-smiley:
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 22, 2014, 02:44:39 PM
Just one observation, do those terminus guys have drugs or something? because if you cut a guy's leg while being k.o. doesn't seem enough to not wake up from the pain...or maybe I don't know shit about that.

Maybe he passed out from the pain and they showed him waking up from that. You're right though, awkward plotting.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 22, 2014, 02:50:43 PM
i can safely and factually say that if they cut his leg off while he was conscious or unconscious, that he would have passed out and/or gone into shock.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on October 22, 2014, 10:05:47 PM
uh no dude, i'm talking about martin(?) not gareth. watch again right in the middle of the first blurry fire vision, he's seen very obviously eating standing around, he looks like he has a black eye kind of, but that's about it.

guess I wasn't paying very good attention then (late night + eating of a leg = distractions galore)
yeah, they should have given him at least a broken nose and some teeth missing. doesn't seem like enough. Of course, when Cutty from the Cut fucks you up, it probably doesn't take much more than a single punch.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 26, 2014, 11:20:19 PM
best.season.ever.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 27, 2014, 12:24:14 AM
Last season was pretty good, but yeah, this is going quite well.

SPOILERS

They nailed the Terminus story arc. Shouldn't have been any shorter or longer.

Rick and company sneaking back in the church could be seen from a mile away, but it was still a satisfying payoff... and then a bit unsettling of course.

Also in the department of nailing it:

"This is the Lord's house!"
"No. It's just four walls and a roof."

Maggie's delivery sells it. Possibly the best actor on the series. (I called that last season.)

Darryl's reveal at the end was also a tad predictable. It feels silly in those moments when the suspense music swells and you're pretty sure there are 5 viewers out there who don't know what's coming.

It goes without saying, but ending the episode on a Beth cliffhanger is not the strongest option. As atonement, I would accept an entire episode about the adventure that Darryl and Carol just had. Spoiler: It ends with another Beth cliffhanger: They open the trunk to reveal Beth's bloated corpse. I guess that's not a cliffhanger.

END SPOILERS

Saw this linked on the AV Club. Just watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0BnadYbLIU
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on October 27, 2014, 09:10:16 AM
Spoilers 5x03

Darryl's reveal at the end was also a tad predictable. It feels silly in those moments when the suspense music swells and you're pretty sure there are 5 viewers out there who don't know what's coming.

It goes without saying, but ending the episode on a Beth cliffhanger is not the strongest option. As atonement, I would accept an entire episode about the adventure that Darryl and Carol just had.

It is funny that for four and a half season sticking together was one of the main arcs. Now writers are splitting the group on purpose as to get more room for storytelling.

Possible spoilers for the next episode

If you look at episode name and sneak peek, next episode will be probably Beth-centric (flashback). I wouldn't be surprised if we get a glance at Darryl and Carol just at the the end of it. After that next episode could be about bus-group heading toward Washington. Cliffhanger can last much longer that it seems...
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 27, 2014, 11:12:47 AM
SPOILERS

I would very much like that. Seems like a natural turn right now.

Anyway the Beth cliffhanger is the most non-cliffhanger of non-cliffhangers. Of course she made it back alive; why else would Daryl be smirking? Also, Carol is not one to be hidden in the bushes, so obviously it's Beth. The only twist I can anticipate is that Carol isn't with them, but that's unlikely.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on October 27, 2014, 12:16:03 PM
I would very much like that. Seems like a natural turn right now.

I couldn't be wrong as I was in the past and it ended up with "Well, it is just TWD".
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on October 28, 2014, 02:42:02 PM
SPOILS

I think it shows how much better the series has gotten that they were willing absolve the storyline with the remaining terminus people in only one episode. In previous seasons, the show would have wanted to stretch it out over a few episodes if not the first half of the season.

While terminus guy was giving his bad guy speech, I wasn't looking forward to the terminus group being the new villains. You could immediately tell this new guy wasn't up to par with the previous villains. It was like he was pretending. He thought he was a villain but he really wasn't and it turned out it was purposeful. The group eats tainted meat, they have a poor plan to attack the church and are quickly eliminated by Rick and crew. These people were completely unprepared and had no idea who they were up against.

Rick and crew are so battled tested it's hard to imagine an equal foe. In the first few seasons, the terminus group would have been too much for them but now it was almost to easy for them.

Does anyone not like the three characters heading to DC? I would have mentioned it last season but didn't think they would still be around. I would expect these type of caricatures in the comic book but not in the show. 
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 04, 2014, 05:21:27 PM
SPOILERS

This one was a bit muddled. In fairness, so was Beth's situation, so maybe that was appropriate. The rapey stock character was not the best, though.

The episode did make me care about and root for Beth, which is sort of a monumental accomplishment.

Highlights for me were:
- Beth in her escape attempt running past the car that abducted her, with the cross in the rear window. Got chills.
- Carol at the end. You know instantly that she has something up her sleeve (perhaps literally).

Two solid reveals. Not bad.

How long will this new black actor last? And why is he not from The Wire?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 04, 2014, 06:01:12 PM
I like Beth and the actress that plays her more than most people do, so I was predisposed to cut this episode some slack. That said, the cop hospital community felt a lot like the first draft of an idea before they really thought it through and figured out how it actually worked, logically. The doctor is a great character. The cops not so much. Rapey Cop was too obvious, Chief Lady Cop didn't make much sense in action or motivation. Noah the Laundry Boy is marked for death, as soon as Beth gets out and they all reunite and she gets emotionally attached to him.

Not a bad episode, but not a strong one. I'm more looking forward to the followup, as Carol and Daryl's plan to get Beth out reveals itself. Who knows how long we have to wait for that, though.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 04, 2014, 10:12:50 PM
oh dude, its chris!!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 10, 2014, 10:55:28 AM
massive spoilers





ok, i originally thought this was going to be a filler episode, similar to the last one where we get a few nuggets of good information surrounded by a story with new characters and storylines that no one has a reason to care about.

but it held up pretty strongly in my opinion. i've hated abraham and eugene and have felt genuine malice for them entering the story.
this is just me, but i enjoy walking dead as an ensemble of its original characters, i don't like taking off one week to see what andrea is doing by herself, or what beth is doing by herself. it's just never been that kind of show for me, that's not what i like or want from it.

but instead this turned out to be a very well crafted and incredibly depressing episode.
best things:

- all the suspicion i've had about eugene finally payed off, pretty beautifully. its great to look back on his behaviour and have it make perfect fucking sense.

- eugene is SO SAD. i mean, uncomfortably so.
him watching abraham have sex was almost painful to watch.
and who else felt horrible whenever he cried/whined: "get him! get him!" like a little kid at the end flashback? 

- firehose massacre and exiting the bus are definitely in the top ten zombie fights on this show.
almost iconic scenes that were executed masterfully excluding the fact that a deck gun cannot operate without the engine running.

- the abraham flashback wasnt very interesting to me at first until i realized what they were showing.
i was always confused as to why abraham was putting a RIDICULOUS amount of blind faith in eugene.

i mean, this dude has put literally everyones life on the line for this guy that he barely knows, based on something that basically anyone can claim. ( i like the girl saying 'but...but..you know how to do stuff' lol, like there is your proof!)

but seeing it in the context of abraham losing his family and just on the brink of going into psycho rick-hallucinating-lori mode and blowing his head off, someone tells him that there is hope, and his insanity just soaks it up. that actually makes sense.

the only thing that was just eye rolling stupid to me was the forced dialogue about eugenes mullet. that was such a dumb thing to talk about considering the premise and logic of the show. 'why do you wear your hair like that' is retarded the same way 'why do you have blood on you' or 'why are you eating catfood to survive' are.

also: someone help me with this, when abraham punches the bejeezus out of eugene at the end, i kind of got the impression from the music swell and the close up of his limp body and from abraham falling to his knees that eugene had been killed by the force and angle of the punches, and also because he's pretty weak. but EVERYONE is telling me that i'm crazy and he's not dead and they even discussed the characters future on talking dead. am i crazy? am i seriously the ONLY person that came to that conclusion based on the way they shot that scene?

i'm pissed that next weeks episode is the one i thought i was going to see last night, but it was still better than last weeks, and pretty damn good.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 10, 2014, 06:29:56 PM
also: someone help me with this, when abraham punches the bejeezus out of eugene at the end, i kind of got the impression from the music swell and the close up of his limp body and from abraham falling to his knees that eugene had been killed by the force and angle of the punches, and also because he's pretty weak. but EVERYONE is telling me that i'm crazy and he's not dead and they even discussed the characters future on talking dead. am i crazy? am i seriously the ONLY person that came to that conclusion based on the way they shot that scene?

I think it's a real possibility. The way he got knocked out and fell face-first onto the pavement, that impact could easily result in death.

Not saying that's for sure the case, but it's absolutely a possibility based on what they showed us.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on November 11, 2014, 12:16:10 PM
TWD is taking "Lost" detour: character-centric episodes, flashbacks, cliffhangers, comparison with the other groups. Part of that could be seen in later half of previous season. So far I'm all for it, since there are moments where show feels fresh.

Spoilers for (next) episode 5x06

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar_tN0eHkg0

This sneak peak if way more dramatic than half of season two, even if I don't buy it. Still my bet on how long Beth's cliff will hang is up to grab.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 11, 2014, 06:59:59 PM
SPOILERS FOR NEXT EP?

That's basically just final confirmation that Beth is alive, since they definitely wouldn't reveal it in a sneak peak. The initial confirmation was:

Anyway the Beth cliffhanger is the most non-cliffhanger of non-cliffhangers. Of course she made it back alive; why else would Daryl be smirking? Also, Carol is not one to be hidden in the bushes, so obviously it's Beth. The only twist I can anticipate is that Carol isn't with them, but that's unlikely.

Now I suspect the laundry boy is also in the bushes. It's still possible that Carol is elsewhere.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 12, 2014, 11:26:40 AM
the only thing that was just eye rolling stupid to me was the forced dialogue about eugenes mullet. that was such a dumb thing to talk about considering the premise and logic of the show. 'why do you wear your hair like that' is retarded the same way 'why do you have blood on you' or 'why are you eating catfood to survive' are.

Yup exactly. And Eugene's mullet isn't even severe, as mullets go. I dare say it's mild or even borderline tasteful.

However, I do want to say this was probably the first Walking Dead episode ever to have more than one moment of intentional humor. Possibly even 3, I think. And they actually worked. Best one was probably Glenn's reaction to Abraham announcing he was going to go have sex.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 12, 2014, 02:40:16 PM
However, I do want to say this was probably the first Walking Dead episode ever to have more than one moment of intentional humor. Possibly even 3, I think. And they actually worked. Best one was probably Glenn's reaction to Abraham announcing he was going to go have sex.

That was great, as was Eugene's "Cards on the table... I was watching them."
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 17, 2014, 04:10:04 PM
There was such a great moment in this last episode, when Carol and Daryl are sitting in the car surveilling the cops from the hospital. One cop leaves the car and walks out of sight, Carol and Daryl are straining to see what's going on, when JUMP SCARE, something hits the window of their car. They see it's just a zombie and sigh in relief. That bears repeating: THEY SEE IT'S JUST A ZOMBIE AND SIGH IN RELIEF.

How amazing has the development of this show been that they can pull off that moment and it barely merits a second thought. OH GOD IS THAT ANOTHER PERSON no, it's just a zombie, we're safe. There could be whole books written about the trope subversion going on in that one little throwaway moment. If Scott Gimple had been in charge of this show from the beginning we would be talking about it in all-time-classic terms by now.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on November 18, 2014, 05:30:44 PM
Spoilers 5x06

Anyway the Beth cliffhanger is the most non-cliffhanger of non-cliffhangers. Of course she made it back alive; why else would Daryl be smirking? Also, Carol is not one to be hidden in the bushes, so obviously it's Beth. The only twist I can anticipate is that Carol isn't with them, but that's unlikely.

Turns out it is cliffhanger in the end - feels good, when writers can pull off twist like that. I wasn't so optimistic about any season yet of TWD and it isn't even a mid-season.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 24, 2014, 12:33:32 AM
fuck  this show;
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 25, 2014, 04:04:13 PM
SPOILERS

That was one of the lesser episodes of the season, perhaps, but it was still good. Incidentally, I think the ending was less plausible than the ending of the Homeland ep. Shame. I was cringing as soon as she turned her back. That is probably the weakness of this season... building to these moments of surprise that are altogether not surprising.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 25, 2014, 04:34:17 PM
spoils


yeah definitely. let me rephrase my frustration.
it was a very good episode but painfully obvious filler.
they are stretching this shit out WAY too much. has it seriously taken us 4 episodes to get to this goddamn hospital. oh my bad, we're not even there yet.

eugenes presence is just annoying at this point. everything in this episode with him and abraham was just silly and pointless little filler scenes that accomplished absolutely nothing.
another who gives a shit a moment would be her finding the yoyo. the way they edited that scene made it seem like she found some CRAZY shit that would add a weird twist.

i guess i'm mostly pissed because this has been a truly amazing and artful season so far. a couple episodes have been kind of weak, but 'no sanctuary' and 'four walls and a roof' like episodes were so great it didn't really matter.
oh well, looking forward to finally getting some satisfaction next week.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 25, 2014, 04:41:44 PM
it was a very good episode but painfully obvious filler.
they are stretching this shit out WAY too much. has it seriously taken us 4 episodes to get to this goddamn hospital. oh my bad, we're not even there yet.

I think I agree with that. I ended up feeling selfish that I just wanted them to get to the hospital already, because the filler content was pretty good. For example, Rosita is an actual human being now. Still, the pace set by the season premier... well, things have certainly shifted into a lower gear.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on December 02, 2014, 05:55:16 PM
So nobody has seen the mid-season finale???  :yabbse-thumbdown:

<<<< SPOILERS >>>>

Probably the weakest finale I can remember. The whole thing seemed slow, boring, predictable and uneventful.

- If someone HAD TO DIE in that episode, for sure it was going to be Beth after getting so much exposure already this season on her own. Especially when they do the "Beth is alive" bit to Maggie. Too obvious.

- By far the best moment was the beginning of the episode and Rick chasing, running over and then just killing that dude. Awesome.

- The whole setup leading into the meeting with the hospital people was weird. Then it all just happens. It wasn't fun. That scene was OK but considering we were waiting for like 6 episodes for that meeting it was totally lame. And then they just leave. What was the point of all that with the hospital? All the other stories with the Governor, Terminus, etc seemed to have a much more interesting arc with deeper characters. I could not tell one hospital dude from another. The doctor was supposed to be relevant and he didn't say shit.

- The priest is a moron. Why did he do all that? And why do Michonne and Carl just stand there outside the church not beating the crap out of him or figuring out what's next? It just happened that the fire truck drove right at that moment. It was not very good.

- Morgan. Can't wait to see what he's up to.

Anyways, I could go on but I won't. I want to hear what others think. I felt like this season had some incredible moments and episodes but this was disappointing to me and sucks that we have to wait 2 months to see what they come up with next.

 


Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on December 02, 2014, 06:22:28 PM
It was fine. As good as this half-season has tended to be in terms of character work, they never figured out how to make that hospital setup either sensical or compelling. I'm happy to be done with it and on to the next thing already.


*I know "sensical" is not an actual word, per se, but it deserves to be, so I'm trying to make it happen.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 02, 2014, 10:49:09 PM
it was awful. if i didn't see it coming, i'd be offended.
spoilers obvs
-
-
-
bullet points of horrible:

-beths death was bullshit and non sensical.
she's back with the group. she's free. she's safe.
so she decides to stab an armed woman that has shown her compassion and protection to the point of betraying people she's known longer. in the shoulder. beth, who has been trained on how to kill things effectively by doing so on a daily basis for a huge amount of time now, stabs an armed living person in the shoulder with a pair of scissors. i'll just let that sink in for a second.

- carols return having zero attention given to it felt odd, as did the entire exchange scene. so much build up for absolutely nothing.


 more later. rewatching now.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on December 03, 2014, 09:14:38 AM
Spoilers 5x08

Probably the weakest finale I can remember. The whole thing seemed slow, boring, predictable and uneventful.

- By far the best moment was the beginning of the episode and Rick chasing, running over and then just killing that dude. Awesome.

- The whole setup leading into the meeting with the hospital people was weird. Then it all just happens. It wasn't fun.

- The priest is a moron. Why did he do all that?

- Morgan. Can't wait to see what he's up to.

Anyways, I could go on but I won't. I want to hear what others think. I felt like this season had some incredible moments and episodes but this was disappointing to me and sucks that we have to wait 2 months to see what they come up with next.

Seems like this season is full of great short moments. On the other hand supposed big payoffs often feel heavy handed and predictable. Few other points:

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 03, 2014, 02:15:15 PM
dude andreas death was better than this.  that is saying a LOT.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Brando on December 03, 2014, 02:50:13 PM
- By far the best moment was the beginning of the episode and Rick chasing, running over and then just killing that dude. Awesome.

The show used to have decent to good opening teasers regularly but seem to have gotten away from it. The finale's was the best one they've had in a while.

After commenting on how well the show has been, the last two episodes have been disappointing. Some of the action has been awkward. In the second to last episode, the entire scene with them capturing the cops was very amateurish. The way the third cop is able to drive in shooting an assault rifle and get away with the others with no one being shot is just stupid. Then moments later the third cop gets into a fist fight with Darryl. What happened to his gun? Also, in the final moments of the episode we can all see what the "good" cop is planning. He just runs away. Why doesn't he take the gun? Why doesn't he take the gun and free the other cops? 

The last scene of the finale is just bad. Why would either group agree to meeting in a narrow hallway? If it went wrong, it'll be a blood bath on both sides. It also doesn't work visually and aesthetically. Especially since Rick just had a meeting on top of a garage that was way more interesting visually. There was absolutely no tension or build up either.

The entire episode was to geared toward the shock of Beth's death. But as it's been pointed out, it wasn't shocking. You could see it coming. I think the scene in the hallway suffered cause they were trying not to tip off Beth's Death.

In the finale, they should have cut all the fill/unnecessary scenes which there was a lot. Use the extra time on the hostage exchange and set it on top of the garage. Then have the hostage exchange full of tension and build it up to Beth's death.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 03, 2014, 03:45:59 PM
should have been more like the exchange with the vatos in the nursing home.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Mel on February 09, 2015, 01:25:00 PM
5x09 MAJOR SPOILERS

dude andreas death was better than this.  that is saying a LOT.

Guess Tyreese dying in a bottle episode beats that. What a lousy episode. I'm not sure where I stumbled upon question "Who will sing now, since Beth is gone?", but fuck off. Lori-like comebacks all the way again. I could be done with TWD after this.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 09, 2015, 02:55:19 PM
I had the opposite reaction. If that episode was an indication of what the show will be capable of from here on out, I'm all in.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 09, 2015, 03:27:28 PM
spoilers



..

this episode was absolute garbage and very difficult to watch.

made no sense:
. tyreese's random lack of caution
. tyreese not being able to catch up to a limping boy
. tyreese, a 280 plus pound black guy not being able to strong arm a walker a third his mass
. noah takes like two fucking hours to navigate a neighborhood he GREW UP IN to get to rick, and then somehow ends up trapped under a fucking chair
. the governors presence. like his relationship with tyreese was even a relevant plot detail?
. the fact that a place has been previously overrun with walkers has EVER been a problem to them?
"nope, looks like zombies have been here, that's a definite no. let's go back out to walking in the woods now guys." its kind of a prerequisite for everywhere now isn't it? at least as far as they're concerned.

that beard is getting to ewok level.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 13, 2015, 01:50:50 PM
I wasn't sure what the think of this episode, and I think I ended up somewhere in the middle, mostly pleased with it.

Greg Nicotero directed this one. He's known as a makeup & special effects wizard, and I feel like he's trying perhaps a little too hard to establish his credibility as a director. I appreciated the artistry of the direction and loved the cold open, but it drifted into pretentiousness at times later on. Perhaps that was more the fault of the editing, which held on certain shots a bit too long (like the blood on the picture frame).

But the writing was especially weird, so maybe that was the problem. Some of the sentences coming out of the characters' mouths were so fragmentary as to border on actual nonsense. (There was more of that in the first half.) Then they had to include one of the dreaded Walking Dead repeated theme phrases ("this was always going to happen" or something), which I think made me physically cringe the third time it was said.

It's a shame Tyrese had to die, but I suppose they decided they didn't want to go anywhere else with his character. That, and someone at AMC probably alerted them that since they added a black character, they had to take one away. (We got the preacher in exchange for Bob, and now Noah in exchange for Tyrese. Who did T-Dog die for? I don't remember.)


tyreese, a 280 plus pound black guy not being able to strong arm a walker a third his mass

Yeah, that one really took me out of the experience. That strained credulity, even in this show.

And I guess when you think about it, they've never really done a great job convincing us why these shambling flesh skeletons can't simply be kicked over. If they were actually strong, they'd be able to run. One-on-one, they are only effective as a slow-moving threat if they have some extraordinary weight to them, which they clearly don't.

They seem to have the gift of forward momentum, but that can easily be used against them, right? Just sidestep a bit, trip them, whatever. They shouldn't have the agility to keep up with very simple moves like that. (Pete should chime in here.)

noah takes like two fucking hours to navigate a neighborhood he GREW UP IN to get to rick

To be fair, I think when we moved to Rick's POV, we shifted back in time a bit.

and then somehow ends up trapped under a fucking chair

Well, you got me there.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on February 13, 2015, 02:10:46 PM
For a show where the characters seem to be highly capable, they sure do get snuck up on a lot.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 13, 2015, 10:04:24 PM
Quote
To be fair, I think when we moved to Rick's POV, we shifted back in time a bit.

yeah, that makes sense actually.
it just felt like noah had no urgency in getting to them as quickly as possible, the way it was done.

Quote
Who did T-Dog die for? I don't remember.)
tyreese i guess? or that one black prisoner?

Quote
For a show where the characters seem to be highly capable, they sure do get snuck up on a lot.

dude, thank you, exactly. beth's death was a perfect example of this, that i think i mentioned previously.
for someone that is heavily experienced in killing things, to just stab someone who's holding a gun with a pair of scissors?! absolutely ridiculous.

now the polar opposite of that, such as carol gradually becoming badass at weapons, that's awesome and makes sense. these people should be getting BETTER at what they do.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 14, 2015, 12:59:01 AM
Beth committed suicide by cop. She knew exactly what she was getting herself into.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 14, 2015, 02:00:27 AM
uh.  the eh...what?!?!
holy shit please elaborate.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 14, 2015, 03:14:50 AM
She knew what would likely happen as a result of her actions. She had just reached her breaking point and wasn't willing to let Dawn get away with what she had been doing.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Punch on February 14, 2015, 03:35:24 AM
Did anyone else notice the emphasis they put on Glenn and the bat? They're staying pretty close to the source material this season
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 16, 2015, 04:43:12 AM
Okay, even I can't defend the writing in that episode.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 16, 2015, 11:42:08 AM
Actually, for a while I thought it was great. The silent stuff worked so well and I think bodes well for future episodes. But yeah, there were 2 or 3 very problematic moments.

From the AV Club review:

Here is an example of bad writing: Maggie, referring to a zombie: “She could’ve shot herself.” Carol: “Some people can’t give up.” That’s not a bad exchange. Little obvious, but not bad. Then Carol adds, “Like us.” As though it were possible for anyone watching the show to not make that connection. The series’ themes are so repetitive and one note that’s hilariously insulting that the writers believe we still need training wheels to keep up.

Also I guess I accidentally predicted the "push the zombies down the hill" scene:

They seem to have the gift of forward momentum, but that can easily be used against them, right? Just sidestep a bit, trip them, whatever. They shouldn't have the agility to keep up with very simple moves like that.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 16, 2015, 11:50:06 AM
Actually, for a while I thought it was great. The silent stuff worked so well and I think bodes well for future episodes. But yeah, there were 2 or 3 very problematic moments.

From the AV Club review:

Here is an example of bad writing: Maggie, referring to a zombie: “She could’ve shot herself.” Carol: “Some people can’t give up.” That’s not a bad exchange. Little obvious, but not bad. Then Carol adds, “Like us.” As though it were possible for anyone watching the show to not make that connection. The series’ themes are so repetitive and one note that’s hilariously insulting that the writers believe we still need training wheels to keep up.

Also I guess I accidentally predicted the "push the zombies down the hill" scene:

They seem to have the gift of forward momentum, but that can easily be used against them, right? Just sidestep a bit, trip them, whatever. They shouldn't have the agility to keep up with very simple moves like that.

Yeah, I should specify I meant the dialogue specifically. So incredibly overwrought this week.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 25, 2015, 05:10:38 PM
Did anyone else notice the emphasis they put on Glenn and the bat? They're staying pretty close to the source material this season

didnt see this earlier. super spoilery dude.
can we make it a strict rule to keep the book out of this thread? that needs to be moderated, mods.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 26, 2015, 10:55:41 AM
That was a fairly excellent episode. Gave me some nostalgia for the Henry Gale story from Lost.

I have to say, this new place sounds somewhat promising. It surely can't be another Woodbury.

There are still so many potential conflicts, though. Maybe only some of them pass the "audition" process, for example.

But what's more likely is that they're facing some kind of looming outside threat that they need a lot of help defending against. This would be a decent explanation for why they were so desperate to recruit Rick & friends, who are clearly resilient and battle tested and probably have the right balance of ferocity and morality.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 03, 2015, 01:31:13 PM
This was probably one of my favorite episodes ever. So much effortless atmosphere. I don't remember feeling so with the characters like this for a long time, if ever.

Except Daryl. He can grow up now.

How is this show, which can be so dumb, able to execute this level of nuance? So many strong scenes, one after another. Carol's act was great. And I especially liked the argument scene with Glen for some reason.

Also, lots of genuinely funny moments:
- Self-described douchebag guy calling the guns "sweet ass biscuits"
- The "I have good news" guy attempting to make another joke that immediately falls flat with Rick
- Carol/Daryl scene ("You look ridiculous")

I think I was right about an imminent outside threat. There's something for sure. This was sparked by an AV Club comment I read, but what if the fence-climbing girl is going to meet her group outside the wall? Maybe they've been watching the whole thing, both groups... and they watched Rick hide his gun, which explains its unlikely disappearance.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 03, 2015, 10:47:50 PM
This was probably one of my favorite episodes ever. So much effortless atmosphere. I don't remember feeling so with the characters like this for a long time, if ever.

Except Daryl. He can grow up now.

How is this show, which can be so dumb, able to execute this level of nuance? So many strong scenes, one after another. Carol's act was great. And I especially liked the argument scene with Glen for some reason.

Also, lots of genuinely funny moments:
- Self-described douchebag guy calling the guns "sweet ass biscuits"

- The "I have good news" guy attempting to make another joke that immediately falls flat with Rick
- Carol/Daryl scene ("You look ridiculous")

I think I was right about an imminent outside threat. There's something for sure. This was sparked by an AV Club comment I read, but what if the fence-climbing girl is going to meet her group outside the wall? Maybe they've been watching the whole thing, both groups... and they watched Rick hide his gun, which explains its unlikely disappearance.


so whats up with the 'no book' thing i proposed earlier, bc if not, then this post is open season.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 03, 2015, 11:56:12 PM
I agree with no comic spoilers. (Although I'm not convinced that other post was a major one necessarily. Or maybe I'd rather remain ignorant.)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 11, 2015, 03:28:07 PM
So can we all agree that carol is officially the best character of this show?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 11, 2015, 05:37:10 PM
Absolutely. And maybe the best actor. Glen and Maggie (separately) have had some awe-inspiring acting moments too, but it's been a while. Carol has had consistently strong material this season... with Tyrese, with Darryl, and now basically everything she's done at Alexandria.

This was another great episode. All the weirdness with Rick and Sasha was just wonderful (especially Rick getting all dreamy at the end). The Walking Dead is the type of show that is so easily elevated when it gets weirdness working in its favor.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 11, 2015, 09:06:30 PM
i think carol talking to the child was the best part aside from the music at the ending.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 16, 2015, 12:12:17 AM
my god, was that the most violent episode we've seen so far?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 16, 2015, 12:42:00 AM
So that's basically four great episodes in a row. Has this ever happened on The Walking Dead?

SPOILERS

I can say without hesitation that Noah's was the most affecting death I've seen on the show. It sort of had everything... GoT-level gore, Noah being terrified, Glenn being horrified and devastated (there's the acting I was talking about), and the fact that it was 100% unexpected. Hit me hard.

At the same time, I'm sad that Noah is gone, because I really liked his character. And I'm utterly confused as to why they didn't introduce a new black character before offing him. They're breaking protocol.

The key players need to get together and decide where things are going. Rick and Carol need to meet up with Glenn and Maggie. (Where's Michonne by the way?) They need to establish a Plan B and a Plan C right now. I think it's interesting that both Glenn and Maggie have just been motivated to be in favor of drastic measures.

Our group has plenty of warning. If they don't end up on top, that would strain credulity.

Deanna has to end up dead or subjugated, right?

Noah's death (a further thinning of the main cast) makes it likely that at least some of the Alexandrians will be sticking around for a while.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 23, 2015, 02:26:55 AM
Well, that ends the streak. Apparently they let the PAs write this episode. Still had some excellent scenes, but it was underwritten and stretched.

Why didn't Deanna conduct a full inquiry about the supply run? If she did, why on earth wasn't that shown? And why didn't we see Tara? Why omit those things in an episode that feels padded?

Rick being evenly matched with drunk doctor guy (who never goes outside the walls) was definitely strange.

Theme of the week: Knowing or realizing that you need to go out and encounter some walkers to avoid getting soft. They didn't necessarily need to repeat it so many times with so many characters, but it did sink in, so who am I to judge.

Oh, and to answer Deanna's question, yes absolutely yes you should have a jail and lock up the wife beater. What is "civilization" without a justice system? How does it make any sense that she's content with a "don't ask don't tell" domestic abuse policy? And why is she surprised that this conflict literally spilled out into the streets? That's exactly what happens when there's no justice system to turn to. Rick even gave her some warning.

The wife beater is a doctor and surgeon (which we still haven't seen at all), so shouldn't they have had him teaching people everything he knows from the very beginning? Less dogwalking and cocktail partying, more learning about how to actually survive.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 23, 2015, 11:39:01 AM
I like how patient they're being with the new outside threat. That shot of the fire burning in the distance had a nice eerie vibe. Everything else though, yikes.

I get the moral quandary of letting your only doctor get away with domestic violence, there's some interesting drama to be mined there. Unfortunately, they're going about it in the most brainless way possible. Sure, he's the only doctor and provides a valuable service, but couldn't one argue that he benefits just as much from everyone else? He's got a safe community, food on his table and a fucking HOUSE. It'd be pretty easy for the community to hang that over his head in order to keep him in line. It'd also help if they stopped giving him unlimited beers.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 28, 2015, 05:18:23 PM
Fear the walking dead trailer premieres after tomorrow nights episode.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 30, 2015, 02:24:15 PM
finale spoilers
=
=
=



this episode was amazing. i was very impressed.
i've been impatient with this story arc bc i know where it's going and i wanted it to get there before the next season. but i wasn't disappointed at all.

best shit:

. carol. everything about her, and the actress. she's just perfect.
she's multifaceted and brilliant and can also balance terrifying and warm and loving.
every scene she was in, she killed it. the way she talks to rick when she first walks in, the way she talks to the doctor guy. absolute brilliance.

. the opening with morgan. i felt this was tarantinoesque, i dont know if i'm alone in that, but the conversation and the action was super satisfying. perfect scene.

. the violence. i know i've said other episodes were the bloodiest before, but DAMN this episode was disgusting!  i don't think we've ever seen anything like the dying guy that gabriel approaches. that was gruesome.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 30, 2015, 03:13:30 PM
best shit:

. carol. everything about her, and the actress. she's just perfect.
she's multifaceted and brilliant and can also balance terrifying and warm and loving.
every scene she was in, she killed it. the way she talks to rick when she first walks in, the way she talks to the doctor guy. absolute brilliance.

Agreed. She's amazing. And you can tell the writers love writing for that character now.

"They're children. Children like stories."
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 30, 2015, 03:48:31 PM
I thought "sunshine" was a little over the top, and the writers may be enjoying Carol a little too much, but in the unsubtle context of TWD, it still works.

Overall, a very satisfying episode. The plot turns completely made sense but were also surprising enough.

In terms of predictions, I assume Rick and Deanna are going to co-lead for a while (with Deanna on board with the new paradigm), then Deanna is killed by the wolves and Rick fully takes over.

Aaron and Darryl should relay the info about the wolves right at that meeting. Next step is making the place more secure (remember all the measures they took at the prison?), which can only solidify Rick's leadership position.

During the meeting, Jessie's bratty challenge to Deanna was so weird... "Did you tape him? If not, you're just saying something a guy said" or something like that. A moment of unintentional humor? (They are much rarer than they used to be, so it's hard to tell.)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 30, 2015, 03:59:23 PM
i agree about sunshine.
i forgot, sasha laying on the corpses was one of the most beautiful shots of the series.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on March 31, 2015, 12:58:36 AM
i agree about sunshine.
i forgot, sasha laying on the corpses was one of the most beautiful shots of the series.

It was a nice shot but everything about Sasha's PTSD arc feels pretty shoehorned. They missed a scene that sold her breakdown, it just sort of happened. Morgan the peripheral ninja felt a little strange but I think he'll be a great addition to the regular cast. I'm glad things in Alexandria finally went haywire because they were starting to outstay their welcome with that story. Anyone else think it was weird that it felt like our group had bigger numbers than the Alexandria residents? Everyone is making arguments for Rick but at no time did they seem outmatched. It seemed like there were less than ten people there. They didn't properly sell that Rick was in any danger of being evicted.

Over analyzing this show seems pointless after so much idiocy but it is rather fun. The best horror movies are the ones you laugh at a little bit.
Title: Re: da Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on April 01, 2015, 12:58:25 PM
People are reporting that Robert pattinson will play negaan nextseason. I'm assuming this is an April fools joke. If it is they need to try harder.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 24, 2015, 11:39:02 AM
The Walking Dead: actually based on Toy Story.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=312&v=4Dg-KC9xjcE
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 12, 2015, 11:57:07 PM
It's official, FTWD > TWD.

The writing is the problem. The writing has always been the problem. They simply will not let us have any subtext. I challenge you, Walking Dead viewer, to think of any subtext in this episode that was left alone.

SPOILERS

Even Sasha's death wish was vocalized by Abraham, then nullified. It's as if one of the writers was reading through their scripts: "Oh you guys, I totally found subtext in Season 5! I know, right? Who wants to snuff it out? Actually yeah, give me the Macbook, I'll write the scene. Abraham totally just asks Sasha about it, then she smiles and says no. Boom, done."

Lowlight: Dumb guy gets his cheek bitten off, Rick tries to shut up dumb guy, Rick puts dumb guy out of his misery... Then Morgan and Michonne proceed to stand there like idiots and brood about the morality of the situation. "I know it's how it is. I do." / "Yeah... I do too." Excuse me... what? How could this possibly be more black and white?

"Directed by Greg Nicotero" has come to mean "may contain ineffectual pretension," and I'm afraid that may be the case here. The structure is kind of brilliant in theory, but I think it ends up diffusing tension, because the writing is not really there to support it. Feels like a pretty great delivery system with not much to deliver.

The horn is a purposeful malicious thing, right? It's gotta be one of these:

- Gabriel (rooting for this)
- The Wolves (most likely)
- Blonde lady's son (possible). Sullen teenagers will do anything for attention.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 19, 2015, 12:32:48 AM
Carl, we really need to talk about your hair. You're beginning to look like a duplo (http://www.duplonuggets.com/images2/ladies1985.86.jpg).

Unintentional comedy has returned this season: Blondie's angry son (can't be bothered to remember his name) is one of the most ridiculous characters this show has produced. Is it the actor? It feels distinctly like a stage performance. He's emoting for someone well past the camera, that's for sure.

What if the fence-climbing girl is going to meet her group outside the wall?

This is why I've always disliked Enid. They've been dropping ominous hints about her since her introduction. She may be aligned with the Wolves after all. "They're just people." Umm, does she know they're savage murderers? What's with the catastrophically misplaced empathy? Maybe it's the bad boy appeal; she wants to fix them.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 19, 2015, 12:53:03 AM
I think we need to talk about the fact that there are teenage characters with names like Carl, Enid, and Ron, and it's not set in 1956. There's not a Jaxcyn or a Keighlee to be found.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 19, 2015, 01:29:51 AM
http://www.vulture.com/2015/08/madison-baby-name-history-walking-dead.html
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 19, 2015, 01:53:48 AM
I remember that, in Splash, how the whole joke was based around how absurd "Madison" was for a girl's name. It was a simpler time then.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 26, 2015, 11:24:59 PM
Excellent theory that I am definitely buying right now:

http://www.avclub.com/video/walking-dead-theory-so-far-fetched-it-just-has-be--227414
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 27, 2015, 01:12:13 AM
I love how they talk about it in the video like it's the most absurd, out-there, no-chance-in-hell theory, but I am 100% certain it will turn out to be true. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind. Just watch the scene! It's framed and edited in a very specific way that only makes sense if the theory is true. And it wouldn't even be an out-of-left-field copout; in a way, it's paying off an idea that was set up way back in the second episode of the entire series.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 27, 2015, 09:25:35 AM
SPOILERS CONTINUED

Agreed. Guy on the left is dumb. (Guy on the right btw was just promoted from editor in chief of the AV Club to editorial director of the Onion company.)

- The guts are coming out from above him. Probably not an effects goof.

- If half of your intestines are currently outside your body, you would not still be screaming at them in horror. You would be dead or in shock.

- Whenever a major cast member dies, the actor is on Talking Dead for a goodbye. Didn't happen this time.

- Earlier in the episode, Michonne dropped us a hint: "Have you ever been covered in so much blood, you couldn't tell if it was from you, walkers, or your friends?"
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 03, 2015, 03:23:04 PM
There are definitely worse ideas than sticking Lenny James and John Carroll Lynch in a room together and telling them to act.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on November 05, 2015, 01:21:26 AM
On any other universe this was a great hour of TV with very clever writing, interesting dialogue and great acting. But right now all I want is to see what the hell happened with Glenn so I wasn't as interested in this as I should have been. It also was one of the longest episodes of WD ever and I don't think it needed to be.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 05, 2015, 02:12:01 AM
Speculative spoiler alert (i.e., this is me guessing, but I'm pretty sure it's accurate):

Glenn survived the horde by whats-his-name falling on top of him, and then by crawling under the dumpster. He is, however, bitten in the process. He will, through great adversity, have the chance to return to Alexandria and say goodbye to Maggie before dying in the final episode of the season.

It also was one of the longest episodes of WD ever and I don't think it needed to be.

Yeah, there's no good reason it couldn't have been edited down to normal length. It was a great episode as is, but it probably would have been even stronger for it.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 05, 2015, 03:39:02 PM
You could be right. I don't know, though. The producers are already openly saying maybe Glenn is not dead. Would they actually pull a double reversal?

I think the show needs to get past using major character deaths as dramatic lynchpins. They don't even do it properly... certainly can't outplay GoT at this game. Noah's death was pretty great (truly shocking and horrifying), but even there the timing felt wrong.

The Morgan episode was good. The seams in the writing were showing a bit too clearly at times, though. It's disappointing when you realize the entire production is firing on all cylinders, but the writing isn't quite pulling its weight. Definitely got the sense multiple times that these actors deserve better writers. John Carroll Lynch was remarkable.

It didn't make any sense to me the way he died, though. Right? Why did he put his fleshy trunk in the way of that walker? Use your stick, or just kick the thing back for a second. It does often make sense in this show that they're overwhelmed by zombie swarms, but it strains credulity whenever someone is vanquished by a single walker, especially one whose presence is not a surprise.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on November 06, 2015, 11:28:20 PM
Would be torture if they keep his situation a mystery beyond tomorrow night. It's very possible Maggie and the others go looking for him and find nothing and we don't have any updates until the mid-season finale.  :ponder:
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 07, 2015, 01:08:44 AM
That would be very ill-advised. Plotlines like that tend to drain goodwill, and personally, I eventually refuse to play the game and stop caring about the character. (Game of Thrones spoiler: Reminds me of Sansa last season.)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on November 12, 2015, 01:27:54 AM
SPOILERS OBVIOUSLY....

Well, they did stretch it another week at least...

The episode was good to tie things together into what may be coming next, but it was pretty slow in general. Diana officially lost her marbles so who knows where that will lead. Definitely convinced Glenn is alive in some fashion, especially after the announcement that Jeffrey Dean Morgan will play Negan.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 20, 2015, 09:59:41 PM
This was one of the worst episodes in quite some time. I seriously wonder why I spent 41 minutes watching that.

The dialogue between Abraham and Sasha was absolute nonsense. Just a serious of dumb sentences and metaphors strung together, disguised as some kind of poetry, but actually composed of garbage. We've totally heard this exact kind of thing before, too. Who on the writing staff does this, and who is approving their scripts?

Also, why is Abraham pursuing Sasha when he has a long-time girlfriend back at camp, and why are we supposed to think he's charming for it?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 20, 2015, 10:15:05 PM
I think it was always pretty clear that Abraham and Rosita were together out of circumstances, not out of any specific affinity or true affection toward one another. But yeah, the writing in that episode was hot garbage.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on November 21, 2015, 08:16:11 AM
spoilers for last season

polka has anyone made a meme of noahs death that says 'everybody ate chris' yet? if not, you're welcome.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 21, 2015, 12:15:30 PM
Apparently you're not the first explorer to wash up on that shore.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CAQRDZ_WoAAGoKs.jpg)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 23, 2015, 02:01:16 PM
(http://www.ew.com/sites/default/files/1448306676/jon-snow-glenn.jpg)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on November 23, 2015, 04:03:19 PM
SPOILERS

So I guess I was wrong about Glenn being bitten, which is disappointing, though I still contend he doesn't live to see the final end credits of the season.

All in all, a pretty rote episode, but I loved how the final minute underscored the deep fatalism at the core of this show; nothing good can happen without something WAY WORSE immediately following it. It's impressive, after decades of television existing primarily as feel-good entertainment, that two hugely popular shows, this and Game of Thrones, can get away with such a steadfast commitment to the message of Fuck your hope. It warms my black, icy heart.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on November 24, 2015, 11:20:39 PM
SPOILERS

Enid is a problematic character. Her scenes did serve to remind us what a good guy Glenn is — true virtue is having compassion for the most loathsome among us — but they accomplished little else. Also, are we really supposed to forget that she may have been affiliated with the wolves?

Most absurd is that Ron and Karl are fighting for her affection (to the death, apparently?). What's more attractive, her insufferable personality or her dumb scowl? Is it just that she's a female with a pulse? I think this a case where the character is not quite accomplishing what she's meant to.

Enid and Ron kind of deserve each other, though. They can go run away into the woods together, and after their first couple fight, one or both will be dead.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on December 01, 2015, 10:34:08 PM
THIS GODDAMN KID.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on December 02, 2015, 12:26:48 AM
I genuinely hope that they come back in the second half of the season with this kid getting swarmed by zombies because he doesn't know how to shut up for thirty seconds while the rest of the group, including his mom, just keeps on walking, giving the zombies a little shrug, like "I don't know that guy."

Also, "Tiptoe Through the Tulips" is the absolute creepiest song a person can play over and over. If it weren't for the zombie apocalypse, he definitely would have grown up to be a serial killer whose trademark is eating his victims' hair.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on December 02, 2015, 11:22:00 AM
this show overcompensates its realistic amount of stupid people.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on December 07, 2015, 12:29:48 AM
So I just realized that the same dude playing Dr. Dre on Straight Outta Compton is Heath (black dude with glasses and dreadlocks) on TWD. What ever happened with that dude? He hasn't been on any episodes for a while but he is still alive, right?

(http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/walkingdead/images/1/1d/Season_six_heath.png/revision/latest?cb=20150930161129)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on January 01, 2016, 02:59:59 AM
ATTENTION ATTENTION
DO NOT WATCH THE NEW TEASER FOR WALKING DEAD
 it is unbelievably filled with spoilers. i dont know who the heck edited this shit. do not watch it if you care even in the least bit.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 15, 2016, 12:09:35 AM
I was almost out, then they go and make an episode like this. Easily in the top 10 for me. Well done! :bravo:

Sure, a few plot points strained credulity, but they really committed. With The Walking Dead, that's all you can hope for. They seemed to actually take joy in the craziness. Please, more of that.

SPOILERS

I can't believe how sincerely worried I was during this episode. The surprise asplosion in the cold open really set me off-balance. And that wonderful sequence of deaths — each one preceded by a deceptive music cue — made me believe that anything could happen.

The fire, by the way, was heavily foreshadowed in the beginning of the season. If I'm remembering correctly, some people who Darryl met told him they burned a wide area of land to kill a massive number of walkers. He simply remembered that and deployed it in Alexandria.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 22, 2016, 12:54:47 AM
How far they've come since Season 2, when the only thing the writers could think to do was write scenes of endless bickering. (A reflection of the writer's room? Write what you know?) Now, characters actually do nice things for each other and bond like normal human beings.

SPOILERS

Not that I particularly care, but there are so many plot holes right now. They know about Neegan and this very serious threat, but it is not mentioned at all. Rick and Darryl are happy to go on a 2-person supply run anyway, armed only with a pair of pistols. They even chased Jesus into what could have been a trap.

When we last saw Deanna, she was in a house, not yet turned, seconds away from being devoured by walkers. Did they just give her a nibble and leave her alone? Because this week she was 100% unwounded. She also somehow made it out of that house, past the bonfire (not interested), through a gap in the wall, and into the woods. Because walkers are known to flee from Alexandria... away from the lights and the noise? There's no foresight here. They don't take their own universe seriously.

The Breaking Bad writers liked to write themselves into a corner to force a creative solution. The Walking Dead writers just go through the walls.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 22, 2016, 01:36:33 PM
yeah this episode was incredibly entertaining but really really bad at the same time.

nothing really made any sense. the deanna thing being the least of it. (edit: i'm pretty sure we've discussed this before, but despite the 'turn when you die default' thing, there are way too many whole looking zombies. one of the main reasons i fell in love with this show is basically one of the first walkers we ever see has almost no body. that makes sense. if zombies are such a threat why would you portray them doing a bad job?)
i know you guys hate bringing up the book, but its pretty valid here.
introducing jesus at this point is completely irrelevant. the negan storyline is what needs to be focused on right now. in the book jesus' only purpose is to tell the group about negan. so since he's already been introduced in a very intentional way, this character is just only going to be a more hygenic rehash of the wolf guy (owen, apparently is his name, from interviews), get in the way, and probaly be annoying. 

and could they have chosen a more hipster douche looking guy to play jesus?
he looks like he tends bar at a place with bicycle wheels on the wall and aggressively poor lighting.

the rick and daryl thing was dumb, they kept making these weird little amateur decisions the entire time.
i'll have to rewatch it, but i'm pretty sure daryl almost let himself get bitten like twice.

i'm hearing rumblings that negan isn't even going to appear until the finale, which is a really bad decision in my mind, but who knows, it could be great. i just think its really silly to bring up the most iconic villain in the series and kind of linger around it in a seemingly lazy fashion.

but like i said, really entertaining episode just not very consistent with the shows logic or logic in general. big surprise.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Fernando on February 22, 2016, 03:51:51 PM
the rick and daryl thing was dumb, they kept making these weird little amateur decisions the entire time.

that made me hate the episode, it was almost like a campy film where everything that can go wrong does, and it was beyond dumb, look what decisions the most experience characters make:

1. Going out with just two guns like JB already said.
2. They find the Jackpot with that truck, what they do? let's look for more shit, fuck getting back to safety.
3. At the gas station, a total stranger makes a fool out of them and takes the truck...with fire crackers as a diversion.
4. They caught the guy, who already showed some fighting skills, but Rick is in a good mood and leaves the ropes loose so he can escape. He drives away WITHOUT watching his rear view mirror!
5. Hey we lucked out and have the truck again! ok now let's get back to safety...LOOK, A BARN!
6. For some reason Rick wants to take a short cut to the barn, when Jesus obviously falls from the sky roof, then it's a Benny Hill like chase, where the truck ends in the deepest pond ever.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 23, 2016, 04:56:35 PM
Quote
6. For some reason Rick wants to take a short cut to the barn, when Jesus obviously falls from the sky roof, then it's a Benny Hill like chase, where the truck ends in the deepest pond ever.

this is a viral video waiting to happen, with the music and everything.
i forgot how much this part really bothered me, there is no possible way outside of maybe supernatural powers that he was able to get on the roof the way he did.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on February 24, 2016, 04:24:05 PM
It's even better than I imagined it would be:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ySKNzi1bLM
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on February 29, 2016, 03:25:58 PM
so how many people replayed abraham saying 'uglying bumpies' just to figure out what the fuck he was saying? and why did they think that was a good idea?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 29, 2016, 03:43:44 PM
Wasn't it "uggin' bumplies?" Maybe. I might have chuckled.

In any case, that was an enjoyable episode with very few problems (except for Carl's hair). Which makes 3 decent to very good ones in a row. Not bad!
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 08, 2016, 09:32:00 AM
i almost had a heart attack during this episode. that shit was incredibly gruesome.

very vague spoilers not really spoilers:













have that many living people been killed in any prior episode?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 08, 2016, 10:16:14 AM
SPOILERS

Agreed. The knife-sinking was absolutely chilling. Reminded me of Dexter Season 5. Effective stuff.

Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on March 14, 2016, 03:23:36 AM
OH MY GOD WHO IS THAT REDHEAD I CANT GOOGLE HER YET
i'll figure it out but the point is, i'm nottt even done with the episode and she deserves an award.
edit: thank you polka i loves
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on March 14, 2016, 03:42:45 AM
I haven't watched it yet, but I assume from the previews from last week you're talking about Alicia Witt.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on March 15, 2016, 01:40:52 AM
I haven't watched it yet, but I assume from the previews from last week you're talking about Alicia Witt.

She's always great. She banged Tim Riggins (who didn't!) and has had many memorable roles. She also sings. I saw her perform once in Austin a long time ago.

Really good episode. This Negan shit is kind of annoying though. I don't want the reveal to be a short thing towards the end and then wait until October to see what the hell will happen after...
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on April 04, 2016, 02:53:53 PM
*long sigh*

SPOILERS

Turning what could and should have been a powerful dramatic moment of watching a character we care about senselessly snuffed out in front of their loved ones and instead making it a hamfisted cliffhanger was probably the dumbest thing this show has ever done. And as much as I enjoy the show, they've done some dumb shit over the years.

The episode did such a good job of building the tension of the impossible situation the characters found themselves in, and it could have all culminated in this huge emotional climax, but instead they turned it into a puff of dust, an emotionally meaningless event. After all that buildup, "someone" got killed. Neat. Wake me up in six or eight months or whatever and I can try to put myself back in the headspace to give a shit when we find out who.

Bad storytelling. Fucking amateur hour.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Drenk on April 04, 2016, 05:53:28 PM
SPOILERS

I don't watch the show but I've read about how stupid that cliffhanger is. But I have a question. Why does that dude need to kill somebody?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on April 04, 2016, 06:45:41 PM
To be fair, Rick's group has killed like 30 of their people already.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 04, 2016, 10:18:21 PM
SPOILS

All I've been hearing about for like 8 months is Negan this, Negan that. Just wait till you see Negan, etc. Then, to my delight, Negan (and Jeffrey Dean Morgan) absolutely delivered. He's a little skinny, but otherwise, yes, fantastic. Chilling. Terrifying. I hadn't felt this kind of dread from the show since Terminus. The Governor in comparison was child's play. The performances here were stunning across the board. Rick's existential panic was mindblowing. It was one of those moments where a different, much better, even masterful show emerged exactly when it was needed.

To throw all of that away in the last few seconds is one of the saddest and most baffling creative choices I've ever encountered.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Fernando on April 05, 2016, 10:14:22 AM
minor spoils.

completely agree, they fucked up big time not showing who bit the dust.

imagine if GoT didn't show who died at the red wedding, just a little hint that something horrible was going to happen and then wait months to find out, pretty stupid decision. and like GoT, if anyone wants to find out who dies you just read the comic or just a quick google search (which I did). we'll see if they stay true to the comic.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Kal on April 06, 2016, 11:35:35 PM
You guys forget this is a business and that these days it's all about buzz and online chatter to keep the show going.

If they had revealed who dies, it would have been sad and there would be some coverage around that, but now they have dozens of sites and millions of people guessing online, discussing it, trying to find out clues, all that bullshit that they love because it builds anticipation for what comes next. They did it with Glenn's storyline, which they stretched for longer than they should have, but people didn't care because eventually the show delivered what they were looking for.

I agree it was an awesome episode and they fucked it up at the end, but the Interwebs are going crazy and that is exactly what they want even more than to tell a satisfying story and give people what they want.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 07, 2016, 12:40:05 AM
I mostly disagree. Yes, there's a lot of buzz right now, but there's not an episode airing next week that can capitalize on it. By the time next season premiers, people are mostly going to remember how dumb the cliffhanger was, and maybe how widely the show was ridiculed the following day.

In fact, I feel like TWD has never been more on the precipice. The last few seasons they have flirted with greatness and reached some of their lowest lows, sometimes in the same episode.

They did it with Glenn's storyline, which they stretched for longer than they should have, but people didn't care because eventually the show delivered what they were looking for.

Except people did care, and at the end of the season they didn't deliver. There was a massive backlash to the Glenn fiasco, and the show had to work to win people back and earn their trust. Now they'll have to do that all over again. But certainly, if they want to turn more fans into hate-watchers, this could be effective.

Separately, you might be right that, no matter what it does, the show will always deliver what some people need. But I guess I'd like to know what that is.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Tictacbk on April 07, 2016, 01:28:51 AM
I'm gonna go ahead and also disagree. Buzz and online chatter is great and all, but when it's almost entirely "Man did The Walking Dead completely fuck that finale up!" it doesn't do them any favors. As someone who gave up on TWD, came back, then gave up again, all this press has just reinforced my decision to stay away from it.  And I was kinda almost close to giving it a third chance, with everyone saying it was starting to get good. Glad I didn't. Yup, just came in here to gloat.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 23, 2016, 08:33:18 PM
This is a very silly level of nerdery, but it does seem correct...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMdFrhHOYdY
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on July 22, 2016, 05:06:19 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmUz88zoIg0

Long trailer full of semi-spoilers.

MAJOR SPOILER: Negan actually slipped and hit himself in the leg. He laughed it off and decided to kill no one.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: 03 on October 10, 2016, 11:52:46 PM
yall lazy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k4gsUmw7lU
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 23, 2016, 11:27:33 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/xlrDyPV.gif)
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: ©brad on October 24, 2016, 05:23:21 PM
Hah.

I don't watch this show but all these "fuck it we're done with this" articles are pretty amazing. This one from The Verge (http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/24/13378876/the-walking-dead-season-7-premiere-recap-review-end-of-quitters-club) for example.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: polkablues on October 24, 2016, 05:49:48 PM
Oh, for fuck's sake. All the oysters in the sea can't produce enough pearls for that Verge article's clutching needs. The world is a worse place for it having been written.

The episode was fine. It was not fundamentally different from what The Walking Dead has been previously, and it does not fundamentally change what it will be in the future. The cliffhanger itself was still a terrible idea, but how they resolved it is not a problem in and of itself.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on October 24, 2016, 06:14:27 PM
Nah. I'm done.

And listen. I'm the person who was delighted beyond description when, in Game of Thrones, a protagonist's head was unexpectedly popped like a grape. So yes, shock and gore can be mindblowingly great. I also love being punished or trolled. Funny Games, Dancer in the Dark, give me whatever you've got. As long as you have something to say.

What we saw last night was not great. It was meaningless. And ultimately, this serves as a perfect flash point to fully expose the meaninglessness of the show.

Had these events been wrapped into last season's finale, and executed differently, it might have worked. But this... no. This was the worst episode of television I've seen in a while. It's seven minutes of content stretched so thin that you can see right through it. Jeffrey Dean Morgan's delivery is like someone is accidentally playing a podcast on half speed. Even the "horror" falls flat. The deaths themselves are mostly just tasteless and gross — in this cold and calculating way that immediately triggers resentment.

The show has done everything it has the capacity to do. I struggle to envision TWD offering anything more of value. This premiere — a slow parade of random misery that leaves you with nothing — felt like the series finale. It seems appropriate to treat it as such.
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 27, 2017, 09:10:48 PM
The Walking Dead used to be the most popular show on TV (http://www.indiewire.com/2016/05/most-watched-tv-show-2015-2016-season-game-of-thrones-the-walking-dead-football-1201682396/). It even beat Sunday night football. It has now apparently dethroned itself with a slow death march into pointless misery. I wonder if they're surprised that no one actually wants to watch that.

Ratings have dropped 40% (!) in just the first half of Season 7. This has also been the lowest-rated season (https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/the_walking_dead) with critics.

As The Verge (http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/27/14748606/the-walking-dead-season-7-episode-11-hostiles-and-calamities-recap) says: "In the first half of season 7, the plot moved so slowly — and said so little in the process — that the show began shedding viewers by the millions."

Has anyone kept watching? Any thoughts?
Title: Re: The Walking Dead
Post by: diggler on February 28, 2017, 01:06:57 PM
I think the inherent meanness of the Negan storyline has turned some people off. No one wants to see the hero of their show neutered for an entire season. I also think the narrative possibilities have hit a bit of a wall. Group begins to rebuild a community>bad dudes come in to fuck things up>group beats bad guys>repeat. There's only so many times you can do that before viewers get fatigued.

The show has always been inconsistent but sporadically interesting enough to keep me watching. It takes itself too seriously to be pulpy and at the same time is too silly to be taken seriously. It should have never lasted this long but I have a feeling they're going to run it into the ground. Launching a terrible spinoff show didn't help matters.