PDA

View Full Version : AMC's "The Walking Dead" Season 2 (spoilers)



TheBrett
2011-Oct-20, 05:15 PM
Is anyone else here following Season Two of "The Walking Dead"? Or "Walking Dead" in general? Personally, I loved the first season, short as it is. The zombies are handled well (for Romero-style zombies), and the characters are all rather interesting. There's some silliness (the CDC has a massive self-destruct system on a deadman's switch?), but overall the drama is good.

I also liked most of the premiere. The plot of the episode - trying to find the lost Sophia - was good, and the inability to find her by the end sadly realistic. The actual ending was a huge shocker, and I wonder if they'll actually have Carl die (it would be a divergence from the comic series, but the show has already diverged heavily from the comic). It would be a great way to introduce the "Romero Rules" of the story (anyone who dies without massive head trauma comes back as a zombie), and have Rick reveal that he knows this ever since the CDC Guy told him.

So far, I'm hopeful. The storyline still seems to be focused on the day-to-day struggle to survive, and that's what drew me into the series in the first place. Unfortunately, the comic this is based on leans heavily on the whole "Real Monster is Man" theme, and if the show decides to go into that pretty heavily, I might drop the series from lack of interest.

Jim
2011-Oct-21, 02:28 AM
I watched the first season and I'll be watching this season. It is very, very good.

And, I don't think Carl will die.

R.A.F.
2011-Oct-21, 02:42 AM
..and soon there will be another Zombie TV show based on the movie Zombieland.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Oct-21, 10:56 AM
I've deliberately avoided reading most of your post to avoid spoilers, TheBrett, but wanted to contribute that they're starting showing series 2 tonight here in the UK.

So I will soon be in a position to read your post properly and comment on it soon!

Fazor
2011-Oct-21, 01:33 PM
We're watching it.

***Spoiler alert? (very mild) *** I had read some complaints about the season premier being slow, but I didn't think it was any slower than most of the other episodes. That's what I love about tWD; every scene has a sense of despair, dread, suspense, stress, etc . . . but that doesn't mean every scene will end with a massive zombie attack. *** end spoiler ***

In all, I love the series to this point. But with the director being let go by incompetent network execs after season one, and a huge push by them to slash the show's budget, all we can do is wait and see if the series can continue the vibe and pace it's set up.

TheBrett
2011-Oct-21, 05:22 PM
I was worried about that as well, since $750,000 lost per episode is a [very large chunk of the show's budget. That said, the show still looked pretty fantastic even with the budget cuts, and the zombies (if anything) actually looked better. I remember reading that Darabont was fighting with the AMC people about how frequently the zombies appeared on-screen before he was fired, and it looks like his successor won out.

I'm still wondering why AMC stuck it to the show so bad, when it's their highest rated original television program by far ("Mad Men" and "Breaking Bad" don't even come close). Is it simply that AMC actually owns "The Walking Dead", whereas "Mad Men" and "Breaking Bad" are owned by outside companies that could threaten to take the shows elsewhere if AMC put too much pressure?


I watched the first season and I'll be watching this season. It is very, very good.

I was astonished at how good it was when I watched it for the first time. I usually don't care for zombie shows/movies, but this was engrossing.

I think it's one of those shows that really should be watched all the way through, though. I watched the premiere episode streaming on AMC.com, and it really cut into the tension to have it interrupted by commercials every 10 minutes.

Fazor
2011-Oct-22, 02:33 AM
I remember reading that Darabont was fighting with the AMC people about how frequently the zombies appeared on-screen before he was fired, and it looks like his successor won out.

Between the number of zombies and the number of abandoned vehicles and sprawling outdoor shots, I couldn't help but wonder if it was a "screw you, AMC" from the new director. A big, big part of me hopes it was.


I was astonished at how good it was when I watched it for the first time. I usually don't care for zombie shows/movies, but this was engrossing. A thousand times yes! Zombies fall only to vampires in the list of pop cult subjects I couldn't care less about, but somehow The Walking Dead still grabbed me from the very first part of the first episode.

TheBrett
2011-Oct-22, 06:27 AM
They might have saved some money on sets with that premiere. There was the one road set with all the corpses, and then the rest of the episode took place in what were probably cheap location shots. I also wonder if they'll kill off more characters, since the comic this is based on is supposedly notorious for doing that.

geonuc
2011-Oct-22, 09:30 AM
Count me as one who helped drive the Season One ratings up. I loved the show. The premiere of Season Two - not so much. I definitely could have done without the scenes in that church and I'm getting annoyed that the characters don't do more to ensure their own survival.

Two examples of that last point: First, while stuck in Atlanta freeway traffic (nice touch, I thought) they post a lookout on top of the RV, who despite vigilance, fails to warn everybody in time for them to do more than hide under the cars. By this time, they should know that walkers come out nowhere and if they don't have a hundred meters of clear line-of-sight, they need to expect zombies. But no, they're wandering around the cars scavenging like there's no danger, except for the two mothers warning their children to stay close.

Second, why on earth would they leave Atlanta in that claptrap RV with a broken radiator hose? And the other vehicles aren't much better. Atlanta is a major metropolitan area and there are literally thousands of better vehicles to chose from laying about the city. What they need are several large four wheel drive SUV's. We shouldn't be forced to accept that every member of the group is too stupid to suggest better transportation when it's there for the taking.

Buttercup
2011-Oct-22, 01:49 PM
Still don't understand the fascination with zombies.

TheBrett
2011-Oct-22, 03:26 PM
Two examples of that last point: First, while stuck in Atlanta freeway traffic (nice touch, I thought) they post a lookout on top of the RV, who despite vigilance, fails to warn everybody in time for them to do more than hide under the cars. By this time, they should know that walkers come out nowhere and if they don't have a hundred meters of clear line-of-sight, they need to expect zombies. But no, they're wandering around the cars scavenging like there's no danger, except for the two mothers warning their children to stay close.

They had to spread out to find gas and the replacement parts for the RV. They didn't have the line-of-sight, but what else could they do if they wanted to get moving again as fast as possible?

On the other hand, their wandering around after the swarm is gone isn't so bright. I would chalk it up to them not being a particularly disciplined group (the tents and surprise attack last season are proof of that).


Second, why on earth would they leave Atlanta in that claptrap RV with a broken radiator hose? And the other vehicles aren't much better. Atlanta is a major metropolitan area and there are literally thousands of better vehicles to chose from laying about the city. What they need are several large four wheel drive SUV's. We shouldn't be forced to accept that every member of the group is too stupid to suggest better transportation when it's there for the taking.

They left Atlanta in a near-panicked flight after the CDC near-disaster. I doubt they were thinking clearly enough to make an extended stop to hunt for new vehicles, which would be dangerous as well (you can literally go around a corner and run into a horde of zombies, like what happened to Rick in Episode One of Season One).

In any case, radiator hose aside, the RV actually isn't a bad idea for a vehicle. It's a good "home base", since they could theoretically all get inside it, barricade the doors, and wait out a night free of zombie attack.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Oct-23, 03:46 PM
I've watched it now. I actually thought it built on season one. The prayer scenes were a bit boring, but otherwise, I found the episode very suspenseful, probably because (as far as I know) none of the characters have charmed lives. The cooperation between characters was pleasing too - add me to the list of people who are bored with the "man is the worst monster" theme.

I did wonder why the people in the cars were apparently "dead dead". How did they die, and why didn't they come back?

And was it really confirmed that it's strictly Romero rules? That is, all the dead return rather than just those bitten? I don't remember the CDC guy saying this, but I'll take your word for it.

Buttercup - sorry you're missing out but nothing works for everybody.

Paracelsus
2011-Oct-23, 08:28 PM
I'm definitely watching...LOVE this show. The season preview they showed last week was very spoilerish; for instance, did any of you catch that quick shot of **spoiler alert!!** Shane staggering in front of a huge herd of walkers? For those familiar with the graphic novel series, this scene will not be a surprise.

TheBrett
2011-Oct-23, 11:55 PM
I've watched it now. I actually thought it built on season one. The prayer scenes were a bit boring, but otherwise, I found the episode very suspenseful, probably because (as far as I know) none of the characters have charmed lives. The cooperation between characters was pleasing too - add me to the list of people who are bored with the "man is the worst monster" theme.

I did wonder why the people in the cars were apparently "dead dead". How did they die, and why didn't they come back?

I don't get that either, since they apparently died so fast that they couldn't get out of their cars.

For those who have read the comics, was there some type of super-disease that killed a bunch of people before the zombies started rising? That's the best explanation I have for all the dead people conveniently rotting in their cars (and even that's a little iffy, since the disease would have to be dormant for a while before suddenly going active so fast that it killed people in their cars).



And was it really confirmed that it's strictly Romero rules? That is, all the dead return rather than just those bitten? I don't remember the CDC guy saying this, but I'll take your word for it.

Buttercup - sorry you're missing out but nothing works for everybody.

It hasn't been confirmed. I just suspect that it's either that, or the CDC guy told Rick that Lori was pregnant with Shane's child based off of the blood samples. I'm hoping it's something like that, since it would be hugely dramatic when the secret finally gets out.

Doodler
2011-Oct-24, 03:08 AM
One of the reasons I like the show is that its not obsessed with the gore. It is there, but its concise, purposeful, and isn't overly revelled in. That was one of the big things that turned me off of the Romero zombies very quickly, but this series is easily watchable.

As far as the "zombie rules", it would appear that the disease has to be infected in order to result in re-animation. Which is fine, and internally consistent. Nothing says Romero's rules are absolute to all zombie fiction. The bodies in the cars make for a nice mystery, could have been a military response in desperation (seeing civvies being overrun and helpless, just nerve gas the lot of them and maybe that prevented re-animation), perhaps damage to the nervous systems from the zombie attacks was too severe to trigger re-animation, or they could have been trapped zombified until they dessicated beyond the point of even post-infectious animation, or suicides when they realized they were being overrun. One thing I noticed, not a lot of those bodies looked very chewed on, maybe just a production oversight.

TheBrett
2011-Oct-24, 05:41 AM
I just watched this episode, and I liked most of it. It's clearly a "slow-down" episode after the premiere's shocking ending, and it allowed for both some character interaction and what looks to be the big "Shane alone getting chased by a bunch of zombies" preview shot for Season Two. About the only thing that I didn't like was the opening flashback scene - they should have started with the next scene, where Rick is running with Carl in his arms.

1. We've still got no sign of Sophia yet, but I think she'll turn up one way or another in the next episode. The most ghastly thing would be for her to be either zombified or infected, although I wonder if the show will throw Carol a bone and actually have her turn out to be okay. Probably not, since Carl seems likely to pull through.

2. Darryl continues to impress (good thing he kept his brother's Drug Stash!). He's easily the most capable survivalist in the group, and one of my favorite characters.

3. The zombie that almost got Andrea was really quiet until it was right on top of them. Did it sneak up behind a tree, out of their sight? Or was it just stumbling around there until they had the misfortune to go right through its vicinity?

4. These zombies are definitely faster than typical shuffling Romero zombies, especially when they've identified prey. The swarm chasing Fat EMT Guy and Shane were moving at a slow job/fast walk pace, enough that they had to actually run to stay ahead of them.


As far as the "zombie rules", it would appear that the disease has to be infected in order to result in re-animation. Which is fine, and internally consistent. Nothing says Romero's rules are absolute to all zombie fiction. The bodies in the cars make for a nice mystery, could have been a military response in desperation (seeing civvies being overrun and helpless, just nerve gas the lot of them and maybe that prevented re-animation), perhaps damage to the nervous systems from the zombie attacks was too severe to trigger re-animation, or they could have been trapped zombified until they dessicated beyond the point of even post-infectious animation, or suicides when they realized they were being overrun. One thing I noticed, not a lot of those bodies looked very chewed on, maybe just a production oversight.

I think it was probably a production convenience as well, but that's a good theory. It's about the only thing that really makes sense as to why all those people seemingly died at the wheel without reanimation - some of them looked chewed on, but none of them look like they were shot, or that there was a struggle.

I don't think Romero rules are universal. The main reason why I thought they applied is because that's the case in the comic this is based on, and "everyone who dies becomes a zombie" is one of the best ways to get a Zombie Apocalypse. I don't think an infection spreading by bite would lead to total collapse of government, since you could form quarantine zones like World War Z.


EDIT: I'd definitely recommend watching the Season Three trailer at AMC.com. They come across a zombie hanging from a rope around its neck. Did the guy try to hang himself after being bit, or did he transform after committing suicide by hanging himself? The only other suicide we've seen so far this season was the guy in the tent who shot himself in the head.

BigDon
2011-Oct-28, 12:36 AM
Only problem I had during the first season was the overly contrived "washing your clothes on a rock" scene. I may have made rude hand gestures with accompaning raspberries.

N'uh it would never happen like that. Why, for one, that presumes women automatically know how to do that. A sexist attitude right off the start.

(Vocally seconded by a woman I know who was married to a Nigerian and living just outside of Lagos. Even with the use of "negative reinforcement" permited by husbands there it took her more than a month of daily work to get the wash even passible. She'd get a switching whenever one of the other women in the village mentioned the cleanliness of his shirts en passant.)

BUT the main reason it wouldn't happen is simply because every single house and building is a Goodwill facility now. Free cloths for everybody!

When you reach too far to try and make a social point you just end up making yourself look asinine.

HenrikOlsen
2011-Oct-28, 12:57 AM
And for that matter, why not raid a couple of antiques dealers and get a real washing board plus any other now-relevant tech?

BigDon
2011-Oct-28, 01:05 AM
And for that matter, why not raid a couple of antiques dealers and get a real washing board plus any other now-relevant tech?

Back in the eighties somebody came up with a hand turned washing machine that cleaned clothes by forcing the water through the weave of the cloths and did it in *three* cranks of the handle.

Had marketing issues as it didn't need detergent either.

geonuc
2011-Oct-28, 08:42 AM
BUT the main reason it wouldn't happen is simply because every single house and building is a Goodwill facility now. Free cloths for everybody!

When you reach too far to try and make a social point you just end up making yourself look asinine.

That was basically my point about the vehicles. Sure, there are a lot of zombies around, but there seems to be a lot of places where there aren't too many, or any at all. It's those places that can be raided for vital necessities. A pharmacy would have been a good place to raid, as well, as we learned last show. Not to harp on it, but especially that RV makes no sense. Yes, I know a nice, functioning RV would be great, but the risk of that piece of junk breaking down in the middle of a pack of zombies seems pretty high.

This season is just not living up to season one and I'm disappointed. I'd like the show to better portray the situation as it is: we have a group of people - mostly strangers - living in a world where there are suddenly hordes of deadly zombies and not much in the way of safety. There's plenty of story lines available that would involve these people doing what you know they actually would do: try to stay alive while seeking that safety. But instead we're getting scripts that involve a lot of gross stupidity.

For one more thing - every one of them should be carrying a 12 ga pump shotgun. I believe you'll find one (or similar) in the trunk or cab of all Atlanta police cars. Many will not be there now because the officers would have deployed them during the initial stages of the zombie infestation, but there are a lot of police cars in Atlanta.

Jim
2011-Oct-28, 12:09 PM
And gun dealerships. I don't think background checks are a prerequisite anymore.

Yeah, the RV is nice. They could use 2 or 3. But why not find new ones? Ditto the cars. (An open Jeep. Really?)

But, it all serves the plotline, so you ignore the dumb stuff (like, why are zombies still milling around an old FEMA medical facility?) and get engrossed in the story.

Fazor
2011-Oct-28, 02:13 PM
The RV is the big one; earlier in the series when it broke down it was always in a place where they needed to fix it. Having it break down in the middle of a road just jam packed with perfectly good cars, and the first thing they still think is "We gotta fix this thing!" . . . that, I thought, was weird.

Doodler
2011-Oct-28, 10:37 PM
I think we all need to keep in mind that as a work of enclosed fiction, certain contrivances have to be allowed for in order to keep the series interesting from week to week. As far as the RV goes, its Dale's RV, its his connection to his life. People do get sentimental, ya know? Especially when the world goes mad. I remember that from the series premiere when Rick and Morgan were joking about how Morgan's wife went immediately to family photos when the decision came down to evacuate and how Rick knew Laurie was alive because those same types of photos were missing.

People need physical anchors to steady their reality when their reality is taking heavy broadsides. Dale has his RV, Darryl his bike (bike?!), and Andrea has the gun her father gave her.

BigDon
2011-Oct-29, 07:34 PM
Yes, you're quite right Dood.

That was in my mind as well but I didn't see it appling to dirty socks and underwear. :)

You know how many sets of BVD's you could stow in that RV in twenty minutes?

Paul Beardsley
2011-Oct-29, 09:56 PM
I'm behind you all but I caught up this evening.

I thought it was going to be an episode without walkers. (It can be done. UFO did two episodes without UFOs, and another two in which they were peripheral to the story.) Then I thought there'd just be that one in the woods. The ending proved something of a cliffhanger after that!

I'm struck by how good it is in terms of TV drama. It's not Dawn of the Dead dragged out over interminable episodes, and it's not a soap with zombies. It feels like it's about believable people, all fallible but not needlessly and tiresomely unpleasant, as they tend to be in these things - that stuff we talked about last week about the hackneyed "man is the monster" blah.

So how did the girl do such a good job of getting herself completely and utterly lost? It wasn't that far back to the road! Has she been eaten? Will she be eating? Is there a living bloke in the forest who just buries people alive? And what of the boy? Will he die? If so, will he stay dead because he hasn't been bitten, or will we get clarification of the rules? And will I start learning character names?

TheBrett
2011-Oct-31, 05:34 AM
I just watched the latest episode about 20 minutes ago.

I liked it, although I think the budgetary limitations are starting to show. There were a lot of one-on-one talking scenes, like last episode. Some of them were good, but others made me wince a bit (such as Glen's attempt to pray). The "zombie school" scenes were still quite good though, although I'm wondering how Shane managed to escape a broken leg on that fall.

Speaking of Shane, that was a cold-blooded decision he made. I'm not really surprised, though - Shane has shown signs of ruthless pragmatism since the first season, and he probably decided that they would both die (along with Carl) if he didn't leave Otis as bait. It's actually interesting how they flipped your view on that scene within mere minutes. You start out thinking that Shane is once again going to have a stroke of good luck/good decision-making turn to ash in his mouth . . . and then you find out why they didn't show his escape from the school before then. He seems to be taking a turn for the worse, exacerbated by the situations they run into (plus the fact that Lori still has feelings for him, and isn't quite willing to let go of him).

It was a little annoying that the Sophia and Carl situations are still not resolved. Sophia is still missing (and the next episode preview doesn't give me confidence that she's going to be found). Carl seems to be stabilized, but Rick's Group is wearing out their welcome at the Farm, and they'll probably have to move him soon.

I wonder if the Farm People will simply get left behind, or if the Farm will get overrun. They seem fairly lax about security aside from their gated fence, with nobody regularly watching the outside of the house, no attempts to fortify the lower levels of the house, and doing stuff like Otis running around hunting in the woods all alone before Carl got shot.

In any case, I'm hopeful for next episode! We've got a season more than twice as long (13 episodes), and AMC just announced that the show has been renewed for a third season. Hopefully they won't screw with the budget as much for Season 3 as they did for Season 2.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Oct-31, 07:00 AM
Er, are you on episode 3 already?

Fazor
2011-Oct-31, 01:29 PM
Er, are you on episode 3 already?
Yeah; the new episodes air Sunday nights here in the States, and I think you poor chaps are like a week behind.

Jim
2011-Nov-01, 01:41 AM
I just watched the latest episode about 20 minutes ago. ...

Okay, if you haven't seen Save the Last One yet and want to keep some semblance of surprise, stop reading!

You could almost make a case for Shane making a pragmatic decision for Carl's well-being, but that horse don't fly.

First, had he been making a truly selfless, Carl-centric decision, he would have sacrificed himself. Otis has a wife waiting for him. Shane has a best friend whom he cuckolded and that best friend's faithless wife.

Second, how long did it take for him to knee cap Otis, fight with him, get his hair pulled out, beat Otis soundly, and still make it almost to the truck before the zombies got to Otis? It would seem there was a very good chance they could both have made the truck safely.

Third, he still had one bullet (in Otis' gun, which I think I saw him wrestle away from Otis). Why not at least try to shoot Otis in the head and end his pain/prevent his zombification? He's obviously a good shot based on the zombies he downed while running away. He could have pulled off a round from the safety of the truck. Nothing to lose.

Shane, selfless? Nah. Shane saved Shane and made points with Lori.

Oh, really, really neat about the hanging zombie. "A waste of a good arrow." Daryl's starting to become likeable.

TheBrett
2011-Nov-01, 06:36 AM
Okay, if you haven't seen Save the Last One yet and want to keep some semblance of surprise, stop reading!

You could almost make a case for Shane making a pragmatic decision for Carl's well-being, but that horse don't fly.

First, had he been making a truly selfless, Carl-centric decision, he would have sacrificed himself. Otis has a wife waiting for him. Shane has a best friend whom he cuckolded and that best friend's faithless wife.

I'll re-watch it, but Shane told Otis at least once to leave him behind. Otis refused to do this, and that meant that they were both going to die because of Shane's injury and Otis' exhaustion.



Second, how long did it take for him to knee cap Otis, fight with him, get his hair pulled out, beat Otis soundly, and still make it almost to the truck before the zombies got to Otis? It would seem there was a very good chance they could both have made the truck safely.

That was a miscalculation on Shane's part. He probably under-estimated Otis's strength, and didn't think that he would get a good grip on him like he did.



Third, he still had one bullet (in Otis' gun, which I think I saw him wrestle away from Otis). Why not at least try to shoot Otis in the head and end his pain/prevent his zombification? He's obviously a good shot based on the zombies he downed while running away. He could have pulled off a round from the safety of the truck. Nothing to lose.

Otis was almost entirely swamped by zombies not long after Shane got away from him. I doubt he was alive by the time Shane was in the truck.



Shane, selfless? Nah. Shane saved Shane and made points with Lori.

There's that, but I do think Carl was a factor. It also helped that Otis was the reason they were there in the first place.

geonuc
2011-Nov-01, 07:11 AM
Still too much poorly-scripted dialog and action/non-action, but I'm interested to see what happens at the farm. As TheBrett said, they do seem a little lax on security. Who among them might join the group and safely flee with the rest when the zombies inevitably overrun the place, for instance?

iquestor
2011-Nov-01, 10:30 AM
personally, these questions underscore why its such a great series, with great writers. its not clear cut, it can be argued both ways.

personally Shane got into a pinch, probably miscalculated, and traded one life for two - Otis for the himself and the Boy.

I dont think Otis couldve made it to the truck, but we will never know.

I don't think a head shot would've done the trick -- the Zombies might not have stopped to feast on a dead body, but one thats still wriggling is too hard to pass up. It bough shane some time.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Nov-01, 01:28 PM
Yeah; the new episodes air Sunday nights here in the States, and I think you poor chaps are like a week behind.

Thanks, Fazor. Looks like my window for reading this thread is very narrow - weekends only!

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-01, 06:46 PM
Okay, if you haven't seen Save the Last One yet and want to keep some semblance of surprise, stop reading!

You could almost make a case for Shane making a pragmatic decision for Carl's well-being, but that horse don't fly.

First, had he been making a truly selfless, Carl-centric decision, he would have sacrificed himself. Otis has a wife waiting for him. Shane has a best friend whom he cuckolded and that best friend's faithless wife.

Second, how long did it take for him to knee cap Otis, fight with him, get his hair pulled out, beat Otis soundly, and still make it almost to the truck before the zombies got to Otis? It would seem there was a very good chance they could both have made the truck safely.

Third, he still had one bullet (in Otis' gun, which I think I saw him wrestle away from Otis). Why not at least try to shoot Otis in the head and end his pain/prevent his zombification? He's obviously a good shot based on the zombies he downed while running away. He could have pulled off a round from the safety of the truck. Nothing to lose.

Shane, selfless? Nah. Shane saved Shane and made points with Lori.

Oh, really, really neat about the hanging zombie. "A waste of a good arrow." Daryl's starting to become likeable.

I'm rather fond of Shane's character, cold-blooded ruthlessness notwithstanding. Unlike Rick, he seems to have a good grasp of the overall situation he's in and what's needed to survive. Yeah, the sacrifice of Otis may or may not have been necessary, but it certainly bought him a greater chance of making it back with the supplies than trying to drag Otis along would have. Completely distracted walkers are much better than ones that are in pursuit, however slowly. Shane should at least be given credit for volunteering to go on what amounted to a suicide mission. As far as trying to impress Lori, I don't think that's on his radar at the moment, given how bitter he was in Eps 1 and 2 and the fact that he was planning to leave the group. I think he's more driven by his attachment to Carl and residual feelings of friendship for Rick. Granted, he's no saint, but I don't think he's the irredeemable creep everyone seems to think he is. After all, who knows--if I were faced with the prospect of being eaten alive by hordes of undead, I might have done the same thing as Shane.

Regarding Daryl, he rocks. Best character in the series. On the other hand, Andrea is starting to get on my nerves, and I wish Lori a very painful death, which will hopefully come sooner in the season rather than later.

Fazor
2011-Nov-01, 07:02 PM
. . . and I wish Lori a very painful death, which will hopefully come sooner in the season rather than later.
Seconded. But I have a feeling they'll keep her around. It's those annoying, everybody-hates characters that keep people talking, thus they tend to not kill them off.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-01, 07:21 PM
Seconded. But I have a feeling they'll keep her around. It's those annoying, everybody-hates characters that keep people talking, thus they tend to not kill them off.

Well, she's Carl's mommy, Rick's wifey, and Shane's unrequited love. Can't figure out those two guys' taste in women. Even Carol has more on the ball than that twit. Gotta love the opening scene in Ep 3, where Lori is beefing about how reasonable her husband is and that he never yells at her no matter how mean she is to him. Makes me want to sic that hanging zombie on her; poor dead guy deserved at least one good meal before getting an arrow to the brainpan.

Doodler
2011-Nov-01, 11:18 PM
Oh, really, really neat about the hanging zombie. "A waste of a good arrow." Daryl's starting to become likeable.

Daryl's character is definitely showing impressive depth for someone introduced as a basic white supremecist redneck. Probably the best character in the group.



As for the series, they've deviated pretty substantially from the graphic novel, given that Carl killed Shane very early on in there. However, they still may give Lori the same end that she faced in the novel, which will give some people a measure of piece about her. :)

Rhaedas
2011-Nov-07, 05:30 AM
What Shane did was an initial shock to me. Didn't see it coming at all, and seemed out of character, but in retrospect I agree that he was probably running it through his mind that they could either both die and Carl will too, or he could take the way out where at least the meds get to the farm. It's obvious that he's going to relive that decision a lot, so now he's not only lost Lori back to Rick, he's living with being a murderer, even if the circumstances were grim. What a way to die, too...

I love the Daryl character. He's by far the one I'm rooting for. Especially after his Cherokee Rose monologue. He's the total opposite of his brother in many ways.

Also, bet Lori's wishing that she had come clean to Rick about her and Shane. Just keeps getting deeper and deeper...and really, it didn't have to get that bad if it was reality. But it sure is a nice plot device to build up tension.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Nov-13, 09:18 PM
Well, I'm up to date now, so I've read all this thread, but by the time I stop typing you lot will have seen the next episode...

As a People Drama I think it's working really well. All that risk and hassle to get a zombie out of a well... and it ends like that! Nice that a young couple can have a romatic encounter in a high-risk location and it not lead to a life and death struggle. And there were several moments when I really felt this was how ordinary people thrust into an extraordinary situation might cope - or at least try to.

I'm not oblivious to its faults, but on the whole this is as good as TV fantasy gets.

Fazor
2011-Nov-14, 02:36 PM
I didn't understand why they bothered to try to get the walker out of the well. "If we kill it in there, it's blood might taint the water!" . . . but they don't know the exact nature of the disease, and the walker's bodily fluids as it decayed in the water have already possibly contaminated it. *I* wouldn't use the water, regardless of whether or not you got the thing out of there. Just kill it and seal the well.

publiusr
2011-Nov-14, 08:53 PM
Agreed. I tried my hand at some very brief zombie fiction that I posted here http://www.starshipmodeler.net/talk/viewtopic.php?t=93117

It's not a bother to register, and there are other stories on the thread that might interest you.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-15, 02:52 PM
I didn't understand why they bothered to try to get the walker out of the well. "If we kill it in there, it's blood might taint the water!" . . . but they don't know the exact nature of the disease, and the walker's bodily fluids as it decayed in the water have already possibly contaminated it. *I* wouldn't use the water, regardless of whether or not you got the thing out of there. Just kill it and seal the well.

Ah, but then we would never have been 'treated' to the sight of all the worms and zombie-guts splashing around so messily. It was clear to me that the producers put a lot of care and time into that lovely sequence and wanted to make sure it got in there, basic logic notwithstanding.

Jim
2011-Nov-15, 05:36 PM
AMC has a half-hour show "Talking Dead" which follows the second Sunday night showing. If you haven't seen it, you should. It can be a hoot.

Last time, they had on the actor who plays Merle. He was asked if we'd be seeing more of Merle. "That's a really good question." But he offered no answer.

They discuss some of the differences between the show and the graphic novel. It seems Andrea is quite the sharpshooter in the print version.

Now, for a spoiler...

What the heck!? A barn full of walkers?! What is that old man up to?

Fazor
2011-Nov-15, 05:54 PM
What the heck!? A barn full of walkers?! What is that old man up to?
If I had to guess, and considering he fancies himself to be some sort of old, wise doctor (though it was discovered quite early that he was actually a veterinarian), I have to wonder if he's using them for experiments attempting to find a cure. But the foreshadowing points to something more sinister than that.

Given the slow pace at which they reveal and resolve key plot points, I figure we'll know the full story in, oh, three episodes or so.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Nov-15, 05:57 PM
I haven't read the comics, but I've read about them. Someone said somebody had a barnful because he thought they could be cured.

Doodler
2011-Nov-15, 06:33 PM
I haven't read the comics, but I've read about them. Someone said somebody had a barnful because he thought they could be cured.

Minor probable spoiler alert: (admittedly, the TV series has some serious deviations from the graphic novel)

He hoped they could. Plays on part of the psyche of zombie apocalypse fiction as it reflects our own desire to hold on as long as possible, even to our own detriment. Its darned hard to look a loved one in the eyes and admit they're gone forever. Consider Morgan's issues with his undead wife at the beginning of the series.

Fazor
2011-Nov-15, 09:07 PM
The problem would be that most of these walkers are decaying and/or have grievous open wounds. If you cured them, wouldn't that make them dead anyway? I can still see the psychological hook of wishing to see them die "as humans", I suppose.

Doodler
2011-Nov-17, 12:23 AM
Finally got to watch Chupacabra....heck with Lori....Andrea is in dire need of joining her sister in Hell.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-17, 01:14 PM
I'm actually rather appalled at the low quality of the female characters in this show. So far, we've had the following to choose from:

--Lori: A bossy, irrational witch
--Andrea: Another irrational witch, with an itchy trigger-finger
--Carol: A weepy doormat
--Maggie: A slutty witch
--Jacqui: Seemed ok, but now is dead
--Amy: A whiny non-entity, also dead
--Sophie: A rather stupid little kid, also dead no doubt

If this is all that's left of womankind at the end of the world, humanity is definitely on the 'soon to be extinct' list.

Fazor
2011-Nov-17, 02:27 PM
....Andrea is in dire need of joining her sister in Hell.
I agree. I try to not get myself worked up over tv characters, because they're tv characters and not real people. Of course. But I hate Andrea for her whiny self loathing and idiotic tendency to always do the opposite of what people tell her to do because "screw you, you can't tell ME what to do." I was hoping the last episode would end with the group taking turns beating her head in with a tire iron.

I think my biggest problem with her is she embodies the mentality that too many people actually have. "It's all about me, and you can't tell ME what to do." Then, when they do the stupidly idiotic thing they were told not to do and it goes wrong, it's always "Oh my gosh! I can't believe that went badly!"

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-17, 03:32 PM
I agree. I try to not get myself worked up over tv characters, because they're tv characters and not real people. Of course. But I hate Andrea for her whiny self loathing and idiotic tendency to always do the opposite of what people tell her to do because "screw you, you can't tell ME what to do." I was hoping the last episode would end with the group taking turns beating her head in with a tire iron.

I think my biggest problem with her is she embodies the mentality that too many people actually have. "It's all about me, and you can't tell ME what to do." Then, when they do the stupidly idiotic thing they were told not to do and it goes wrong, it's always "Oh my gosh! I can't believe that went badly!"

That's most of the characters, actually. I have to be the devil's advocate here and say I actually like Shane. He is very practical and methodical and seems to have a good head for logistics of keeping a group together and safe under the circumstances. The group was actually doing quite well in their little camp until Rick showed up. Yes, he's a jerk for offing Otis so callously, but I'm not sure many other people would have done differently in his shoes. People may say they'd sacrifice themselves instead, but the impending prospect of being eaten alive by zombies can change minds with surprising speed. Could they have arranged the raid itself differently? Yes: they could have taken some more flares to use as distractions when exiting the FEMA trailer; they could have raided the police cars for more ammo. That said, Shane and Otis were is a bit of a rush given the fact that Carl was on the verge of death; I got the impression that there wasn't a lot of thought put into planning that little venture, which was the fault of both men, not just Shane.

Really, Shane and Darryl are the only 2 characters in that show I'm emotionally invested in. The rest are either weak and annoying (Carol and her kid, Carl, Rick), weak, stupid, and annoying (Andrea, Lori), plain old annoying (Glenn), or utter non-entities (T-Dog, Dale).

Fazor
2011-Nov-17, 03:45 PM
I don't dislike Rick and think he makes for a good play against Shane's character. Rick hasn't been living through this nightmare as long as Shane has, and still has some of his "can save the world" mentality, but I think he's going to start to see why some of that needs to go. I do like Shane, even after the Otis thing. They did a good job showing that he's a pragmatic survivalist, but that the decision to do what he did *does* still affect him emotionally.

I agree that they need a stronger female character. The women all seem weak, stupid, and nothing but a liability. I know a lot of women that could out-survivalist a the majority of men. Where are those characters?

Darryl is my favorite, and Tara's as well. Which just made me hate Andrea's character all that much more. I hope she goes ahead and offs herself next episode. Better yet, tries to off herself and ends up getting eaten alive by walkers instead, so that the gang gets to kill her a second time as a zombie.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Nov-17, 04:01 PM
Hmm. Complaining about the lack of strong female characters is one thing, but I think there's a lee-tul bit of misogyny creeping in here.

HenrikOlsen
2011-Nov-17, 04:32 PM
To me it doesn't sound like misogyny as it's directed against specific women for each as individuals having annoyingly clichéish traits rather than being directed against all women.
Misogyny wouldn't want other women, it would want no women.

Sounds like that world is in dire need for Ripley. Or Newt for than matter. :)

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-17, 04:46 PM
Well, seeing as I'm a woman, hating women in general would be rather counter-productive for me, although it can happen. WD just needs better female characters that don't have such a prominent steak of whininess in them.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Nov-17, 05:07 PM
Yeah, maybe... But the main thing that rang my alarm bells was your description of Maggie as "slutty". Unless something else has happened in the episode I've not seen yet (or I've forgotten something), she's had safe sex with one man. Were they supposed to find a priest? I also wondered about the "witch" descriptions.

But otherwise, I agree - they're not exactly pushing the boat out with female characterisation.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-17, 05:19 PM
She had sex with one guy she barely knew. The intro to it really put me off--she just pulls off her top in front of him and says 'I'm lonely; let's do it'? Weird. I also lament her taste in sex-partners; Darryl or Shane would have been better choices.

Fazor
2011-Nov-17, 06:19 PM
She had sex with one guy she barely knew. The intro to it really put me off--she just pulls off her top in front of him and says 'I'm lonely; let's do it'? Weird. I also lament her taste in sex-partners; Darryl or Shane would have been better choices.

What would add to it is that after the fact, she doesn't really even want to talk to Glenn and basically tells him "Eh, I just needed some. I'm good now. Go away." But I wouldn't necessarily call a guy slutty for that, so I wouldn't call a woman that either. Just not a great way to treat other people.

HenrikOlsen
2011-Nov-17, 08:53 PM
She had sex with one guy she barely knew. The intro to it really put me off--she just pulls off her top in front of him and says 'I'm lonely; let's do it'? Weird. I also lament her taste in sex-partners; Darryl or Shane would have been better choices.
Yep, that's slutty, she shouldn't have pulled it off until after he'd said OK.

Fazor
2011-Nov-17, 09:04 PM
Yep, that's slutty, she shouldn't have pulled it off until after he'd said OK.
. . . I disagree. She should just go around topless for the full episode. But that might just be me. And yes, I'm slutty. I guess.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-17, 11:26 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahaha!!

TheBrett
2011-Nov-18, 03:51 PM
SPOILERS for the American Broadcast of Episode 5:

The latest episode was a step-up in quality (and happenings) from the previous three. We got a flashback to the actual time of the Collapse (Atlanta being napalmed by military helicopters), plus a heavy focus on Darryl for much of the episode. Not to mention that Hershel's secret is out: he's holding a bunch of captured zombies in his barn. Judging by their clothing, they were probably his neighbors, and I suspect that he's holding them because of optimistic hope that the "authorities" will show up with a cure. That would explain his reluctance to allow the group to fire guns on his property, plus Maggie's revulsion when they smashed in the head of the Well Zombie. They might think that the people are just "sick".

Doodler
2011-Nov-18, 03:57 PM
--Carol: A weepy doormat

I'm giving her a bye. She was in a hideously abusive relationship with an emergent pedophile. That kind of stress takes its toll on a woman, even without facing a zombie apocalypse and a missing daughter. If anything, her portrayal in the series is probably the most believable, given the backstory involved. Despite all the weepiness, she's got the soul of a survivor. Let's face it, she's already the most adept of any of them when it comes to dealing with monsters.

Jim
2011-Nov-18, 05:49 PM
... That would explain ... Maggie's revulsion when they smashed in the head of the Well Zombie. They might think that the people are just "sick".

I dunno. He'd just been pulled apart at the waist. If he was "just sick," odds were he wasn't goning to get much better after that.

I think it was because seeing someone get his head bashed in - repeatedly - is revolting. And Maggie hasn't been exposed to that sort of stuff before.

Zombiefan
2011-Nov-21, 06:11 PM
Only problem I had during the first season was the overly contrived "washing your clothes on a rock" scene. I may have made rude hand gestures with accompaning raspberries.

N'uh it would never happen like that. Why, for one, that presumes women automatically know how to do that. A sexist attitude right off the start.

(Vocally seconded by a woman I know who was married to a Nigerian and living just outside of Lagos. Even with the use of "negative reinforcement" permited by husbands there it took her more than a month of daily work to get the wash even passible. She'd get a switching whenever one of the other women in the village mentioned the cleanliness of his shirts en passant.)

BUT the main reason it wouldn't happen is simply because every single house and building is a Goodwill facility now. Free cloths for everybody!

When you reach too far to try and make a social point you just end up making yourself look asinine.

Carol's husband from what I can see is a survivalist. He thought to get rations to bring w/them and surley would have had his wife learn how to do without electric etc.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-22, 04:28 PM
WRT the past episode 'Secrets', I was pleasantly surprised by Andrea's taste in men, plus her newfound marksmanship and zombie-killing mojo. She's now easily the best female character on the show.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-22, 04:31 PM
I dunno. He'd just been pulled apart at the waist. If he was "just sick," odds were he wasn't goning to get much better after that.

I think it was because seeing someone get his head bashed in - repeatedly - is revolting. And Maggie hasn't been exposed to that sort of stuff before.

I think I'd have barfed had I been at the scene of the zombie-in-the-well disaster; I almost did just watching it on TV. Thus, Maggie's reaction could be just a reaction to seeing something unbelievably disgusting happen in front of her, coupled with the desire not to projectile vomit in public.

Jim
2011-Nov-22, 05:47 PM
WRT the past episode 'Secrets', I was pleasantly surprised by Andrea's taste in men, plus her newfound marksmanship and zombie-killing mojo. She's now easily the best female character on the show.

Well, if she wanted a meaningless quickee, Shane's the guy.

I loved his speech to Dale. "Rick's my best friend. I love him like a brother."

Which fully explains why he didn't try to rescue Rick from the hospital and told his wife that her husband - his best friend, his brother - was dead... so he could get her in bed for some consoling, 'cause that's what brothers do.

Drunk Vegan
2011-Nov-22, 09:17 PM
I'm curious, in the comic book, did they ever give an explanation as to how the plague started?

I'm wondering if maybe there was a group of scientists tinkering with resurrection and/or attempting to end aging and the experiment went awry and breached containment in the lab.

Doodler
2011-Nov-23, 02:04 PM
Which fully explains why he didn't try to rescue Rick from the hospital

I think that was simply desperation. From that flashback, he waited until the last dying moment before leaving him, plus he did bar the door to make a passing effort at keeping him protected (which, strangely enough, appeared to work). Honestly, I think that was just a realistic decision about his chances for survival if he were seen carrying a limp body with gun happy soldiers roaming around. I won't fault him there. The real meltdown doesn't appear to kick in until Rick returns to the fold and starts taking "heroic" risks, starting with going back for Merle. By that time, he's beyond the initial shock of the apocalypse, and has entered fully into his "survival mode", held together by the fact that he was the alpha male in the group. Once he lost control, he REALLY lost control.

Fazor
2011-Nov-23, 04:34 PM
Once he lost control, he REALLY lost control.
From the brief looks at "normal" (pre-outbreak) life, it seems that Rick was always the one everyone considered the golden-boy, and Shane was always the one on the coat-tails. For being such close friends, they certainly have completely different approaches to life (as evidenced by Shane's "We need to forget about Sophie" encounter with Rick a few eps ago.)

After the outbreak, he was finally assuming the role Rick always got. He even got Rick's wife, whom he probably pined for already. He was the leader, and he was doing a good job of it. Rick suddenly showed up and took that all away. Ontop of that, Rick's outlook also makes Shane look like a bad-guy and he knows it.

It's understandable that he'd be torn. That he's still stuck around, to me, is a sign of strong character. I hope he stays around, and he seems to be one of the major characters in the overall story so I'm assuming he will.

ETA, and SPOILER for those who haven't seen Sunday's (US) episode yet: That Rick figured out that Lori is pregnant AND that it could be Shane's has me very excited for next episode, to see how this thing between Rick and Shane shakes out. Rick seems to be understanding, if understandably upset.

Doodler
2011-Nov-26, 09:07 PM
True, he's at least at war with himself, to some degree, though he's letting himself off the leash when noone's looking (Dale aside). That's going to explode at some point.

Doodler
2011-Nov-28, 02:11 PM
Mid-season finale...man, what a heartbreaker. I have to hand it to the writers, they really know how to set up a suckerpunch.

Fazor
2011-Nov-28, 02:24 PM
Mid-season finale...man, what a heartbreaker. I have to hand it to the writers, they really know how to set up a suckerpunch.

I agree. Blindsided. Classic case of distraction/misdirection and WHAM. It's going to be a long wait for the show to pick back up in Feb . . .

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-28, 04:34 PM
I agree. Blindsided. Classic case of distraction/misdirection and WHAM. It's going to be a long wait for the show to pick back up in Feb . . .

I saw this coming for awhile. There was just no way Sophie could have been alive after being lost all of that time--Shane was right on target regarding that. The only surprise was that nobody bothered to look in Hershel's zombie-barn. Had people taken Shane's advice RE the futility of continuing the search for the little girl, Carl and Darryl would not have gotten shot, and Carol would've been spared the horror of seeing her child become a monster. Foolhardy Clutterbuck needs to hand the reins back to Shane before he manages to get more members of the group killed.

Fazor
2011-Nov-28, 06:01 PM
I saw this coming for awhile. There was just no way Sophie could have been alive after being lost all of that time--Shane was right on target regarding that. The only surprise was that nobody bothered to look in Hershel's zombie-barn. Had people taken Shane's advice RE the futility of continuing the search for the little girl, Carl and Darryl would not have gotten shot, and Carol would've been spared the horror of seeing her child become a monster. Foolhardy Clutterbuck needs to hand the reins back to Shane before he manages to get more members of the group killed.

Sure, I figured Sophie would be dead. But having her walk out of the barn after they just slaughtered all the walkers of the friends, family, and townsfolk Hershel knew came as a very fitting back-down-to-earth moment. Shane couldn't shoot her. Rick had to. Shane was quick to gun down all those walkers he didn't know, because they were just monsters. He didn't think twice about it, and that was his point. As soon as it was Sophie, it seemed to click for him. I'm not saying he did anything that made me think he'd do it different if he had known, but it seemed to ground him after his emotional break down.

Carl got shot early on in the search. I don't know that it'd have been right to have already given up at that point. Darryl got hurt while looking, but who says they would have fared any better on the road? I think Rick was using Sophie as an excuse to stay at the farm, because he felt like it could make a good home for them.
Rick's decisions aren't perfect, but neither are Shane's. One is purely emotional do-goody, and the other is purely calculative survive no matter what.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-28, 06:08 PM
Rick's decisions aren't perfect, but neither are Shane's. One is purely emotional do-goody, and the other is purely calculative survive no matter what.

Agreed, but, in survival situations, give me calculation over sentimentality every time.

Fazor
2011-Nov-28, 06:20 PM
Agreed, but, in survival situations, give me calculation over sentimentality every time.
For you, but as Dale said, some people prefer to "keep their humanity, even if it means death." It all boils down to personal beliefs, and Shane just assumes everyone else would rather give up those beliefs and live. Rick at least thinks about what others want. I think the two balance each other, if occasionally the situation boils over for one or both of them.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-28, 07:05 PM
Actually, Shane just needs to bail at this point, especially after Lori's little speech about 'even if the baby's yours, it won't be yours'. He was ready to bail at the start of Season 2, but was stopped after Carl's little catastrophe. He's even said that Lori and Carl are the only 2 people in the group he cares about, which, frankly, I'm having a hard time understanding after Lori has stomped on his heart multiple times and even Carl has turned on him. What is left for him in that group? He and Andrea, the only one he seems sympatico with, should do as she suggested in Ep. 201 and run off together.

Fazor
2011-Nov-28, 09:07 PM
Actually, Shane just needs to bail at this point, especially after Lori's little speech about 'even if the baby's yours, it won't be yours'. He was ready to bail at the start of Season 2, but was stopped after Carl's little catastrophe. He's even said that Lori and Carl are the only 2 people in the group he cares about, which, frankly, I'm having a hard time understanding after Lori has stomped on his heart multiple times and even Carl has turned on him. What is left for him in that group? He and Andrea, the only one he seems sympatico with, should do as she suggested in Ep. 201 and run off together.

I was half expecting that after Carl and Shane's exchange near the end of this episode. A slap to the face, in that Carl obviously still looks up to his dad more than Shane. (Though that should be expected, would still be a hard pill to swallow after being the one who saved them.)

I like Shane, so if he does split off, I hope they still follow his story arch. But I don't see them splitting him and Rick, since that's what causes the most dramatic tension in the group.

Jim
2011-Nov-29, 01:17 AM
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?"

Shane is very close to losing his soul. There was just a glimmer of it when he saw Sophie come out of that barn.

Dale's right. Shane is perfectly suited to the way the world is now. But Rick is better suited to make it a better place.

iquestor
2011-Nov-29, 03:28 AM
I missed the episode Sunday so I got it off iTunes and just watched it. wow, what a SUCKERPUNCH! Heartbreaking. Those writers are awsome. great way to end the mid season.
It's going to be a long wait til february.

Paracelsus
2011-Nov-30, 12:37 PM
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?"

Shane is very close to losing his soul. There was just a glimmer of it when he saw Sophie come out of that barn.

Dale's right. Shane is perfectly suited to the way the world is now. But Rick is better suited to make it a better place.

Not if he gets everybody killed while holding to his high and mighty moral principles. There is a happy medium somewhere between the two extremes.

Jim
2011-Nov-30, 01:02 PM
Remember, it was Rick who did what needed to be done while Shane stood there transfixed.

Rick has principles, and one of them - probably first among them - is to protect the innocent. (That would seem to be the reason he became a cop. Shane probably liked the power it represented.) Rick was willing to try to placate Hershel not because of "high and mighty moral priniciples" but because it was a way to let them stay on the farm, a safe place to have and raise a baby.

Doodler
2011-Nov-30, 02:06 PM
I think the real answer lies somewhere between Shane and Rick, and I think the writers are using them as foils to examine both ends of the spectrum from the extreme. To me, Daryl seems to be the fulcrum point. Just enough humanity to give people like Carol and T-Dog an arm to hold onto against the storm, but still calloused enough by Merle to make cold decisions when circumstances demand it. I think his big weakness is lack of self confidence brought on by too many years following in his brother's shadow. He may well have the most balanced mind of the bunch, but he's a beta-male who isn't conditioned internally to take the reins.

Paracelsus
2011-Dec-01, 12:47 PM
I think the real answer lies somewhere between Shane and Rick, and I think the writers are using them as foils to examine both ends of the spectrum from the extreme. To me, Daryl seems to be the fulcrum point. Just enough humanity to give people like Carol and T-Dog an arm to hold onto against the storm, but still calloused enough by Merle to make cold decisions when circumstances demand it. I think his big weakness is lack of self confidence brought on by too many years following in his brother's shadow. He may well have the most balanced mind of the bunch, but he's a beta-male who isn't conditioned internally to take the reins.

Agreed, although he got more than a little obsessed over finding Sophia, probably because he had been abandoned himself and felt a kinship towards her.

Doodler
2011-Dec-05, 03:25 PM
Agreed, although he got more than a little obsessed over finding Sophia, probably because he had been abandoned himself and felt a kinship towards her.

That, and he was still dealing with his decision to stay with the group after they called off the search for Merle.

jamesabrown
2011-Dec-07, 03:42 PM
I was left wondering how Sophia got into the barn? Did Vet find her as a zombie and frog-march her back with the others?

Paul Beardsley
2011-Dec-07, 03:46 PM
I was left wondering how Sophia got into the barn? Did Vet find her as a zombie and frog-march her back with the others?

That's what we're given to understand. Of course, Sophia wouldn't have given her name, being dead an' all.

Paracelsus
2011-Dec-07, 07:07 PM
Yes, but Herschel knew that he had a little girl zombie in his barn. He couldn't have known her name, but he could have taken Rick aside and said something like, 'Hey, we found this undead little girl wandering around; could this be Sophia?'

Actually, if you watch the teaser trailer for Season 2.2, Herschel says that it was Otis who rounded up walkers and herded them into the barn before he was killed. After Otis' death, Herschel must have had to take over. So, either Sophia was bitten, turned, and found very quickly after being lost, or Herschel found her himself. either way, he had to have known, as one of the Green Team would have seen Sophia during the feeding sessions.

jamesabrown
2011-Dec-07, 07:29 PM
Yes, but Herschel knew that he had a little girl zombie in his barn. He couldn't have known her name, but he could have taken Rick aside and said something like, 'Hey, we found this undead little girl wandering around; could this be Sophia?'

Not without giving up the secret of the barn. Herschel had a good reason to keep them there, a hopeful one, but he clearly thinks that he must keep it under wraps. Not a sign of clear thinking, but grief can cause that.


Actually, if you watch the teaser trailer for Season 2.2, Herschel says that it was Otis who rounded up walkers and herded them into the barn before he was killed. After Otis' death, Herschel must have had to take over. So, either Sophia was bitten, turned, and found very quickly after being lost, or Herschel found her himself. either way, he had to have known, as one of the Green Team would have seen Sophia during the feeding sessions.

That brings up another aspect I'm not clear on. So far I've seen a person get bitten by a walker, but then the walker was killed; later the bitten person becomes a walker. Likewise, the walkers ate Otis, I suppose down to the bone, so presumably Otis is not a walker, because there's nothing of him left? Walkers seem to have a mindless hunger for fresh meat (human, horse, or otherwise.) What do walkers live on when they can't find people? Okay, they're not living, but if the horde of walkers found a person and ate them entirely, then how do the number of walkers grow so quickly?

Paracelsus
2011-Dec-07, 07:42 PM
Walkers don't grow physically; they seem to be either in stasis or slowly decaying. They grow in number by infecting others, who become walkers themselves and infect more, etc.

WRT Otis, Otis may not have been completely consumed, and, even if he was completely consumed from the neck down, reanimation as a walker only seems to require that the brain itself be intact. As walkers don't seem to go for brains (either because they don't find them tasty, or, more likely, they can't get at them through the skull), Otis would have reanimated regardless, even if all that was left of him was a battered skull. I don't know if you've watched the webisodes on the AMC website, but that little detail WRT reanimation is indirectly explained in there.

Regarding Herschel, revealing the walker barn wouldn't have endangered his undead 'family' any more than it was already endangered, plus finding out that Sophia was indeed dead would have removed at least one big incentive for the uninvited guests to stay. I understand what you are coming from WRT what Herschel was probably thinking and agree with it; doesn't excuse it, however.

Fazor
2011-Dec-07, 09:01 PM
WRT to Sophie; It's entirely possible that she was turned quickly enough for Otis to have found her. In one of the earliest episodes, they showed that the turn happens relatively quickly (or implied that it did), when Andrea's sister was killed.

But still, you'd think that Hershel became aware that there was a walker that was most likely Sophie at some point. I'm sure all of that will come out in Feb when the show returns.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Dec-07, 10:22 PM
Okay, another reason why Herschel would keep Sophia secret: He knew that Shane and co routinely killed walkers, so he thought he was protecting her from them.

Also, further to Fazor's post, it was established that the time between death and resurrection is very variable - and I think from bite to death is too.

To jamesabrown: usually the assumption is that the huge number of zombies is due to people being bitten and then escaping. You are likely to be in denial about your inevitable fate, and inclined to hide bites. Sooner or later you'll die, then get back up again and bite a few other people before getting put down permanently.

In the third of the original Romero trilogy, it was stated that the dead don't need to feed - it's a compulsion, and they don't gain any sustenance. It also transpired that even after years of shambling around and decaying, the dead don't die of natural causes. The infected in 28 Days Later were very different in this regard.

jamesabrown
2011-Dec-08, 04:06 PM
Here's what I know from what I've seen:

* A person becomes a walker from being bitten by another walker, and the process happens rather quickly, just a couple of hours, IIRC.
* Walkers consume flesh entirely. I can acknowledge that Otis may be nothing but a chomping skull now, but so far, the most decomposed walker I recall seeing is a legless torso crawling across the grass

So how did Sophie become a walker? If it was because she was bitten by a walker, then why wasn't she eaten completely by the walker(s)? There were no armed adults nearby to kill off the walker before it could finish feeding, the way there was with Amy and others.

Or did she die of exposure/thirst/whatever while lost in the woods, and then the air/water/ground/whatever reanimated her corpse?

Or am I missing something else entirely?

Paul Beardsley
2011-Dec-08, 04:14 PM
So how did Sophie become a walker? If it was because she was bitten by a walker, then why wasn't she eaten completely by the walker(s)?

She might have climbed a tree to escape from one, and it bit her on the leg before she was out of reach. She might have reached through an open window on a housing estate and been bitten on the hand by a walker in the house. There are many possible scenarios in which someone can escape after being bitten, only to die later.

I really don't see what your problem is.

Fazor
2011-Dec-08, 05:32 PM
Well, also note that Walkers don't eat eachother. They seem to prefer living things. So, if a single walker was eating a person, it'd likely grow "cold" and "dead" before the walker got very far. It's just one mouth.

But a rabid pack of walkers could totally tear apart something while it's still "warm."

IIRC, Sophie did appear to have trauma. But if she only feel victim to a single walker, she likely turned before she could have been totally eaten. Otis, on the otherhand, would probably be little more than bones.

jamesabrown
2011-Dec-08, 09:15 PM
She might have climbed a tree to escape from one, and it bit her on the leg before she was out of reach. She might have reached through an open window on a housing estate and been bitten on the hand by a walker in the house. There are many possible scenarios in which someone can escape after being bitten, only to die later.

I really don't see what your problem is.

Just trying to figure it out, is all.

Doodler
2011-Dec-09, 02:39 PM
Okay, they're not living, but if the horde of walkers found a person and ate them entirely, then how do the number of walkers grow so quickly?

In the initial phase of an outbreak, you have scads of small encounters where you have one on one infection, or a person is bitten escaping from a small group they can successfully evade. The total consumption beyond the point of enough left to re-animate wouldn't come into play until you have a massive group of at least a dozen or more individuals involved. Even then, you'd end up with a lot of bicycle ladies, partial remnants crawling about. They're not as easily mobile, so the more intact walkers form the roaming hordes, while the partials scooch along nabbing the occassional ankle (thus sparing the special effects budget on animatronics.)

Doodler
2011-Dec-09, 02:40 PM
She might have climbed a tree to escape from one, and it bit her on the leg before she was out of reach. She might have reached through an open window on a housing estate and been bitten on the hand by a walker in the house. There are many possible scenarios in which someone can escape after being bitten, only to die later.

I really don't see what your problem is.

Looked like a shoulder bite, to me (admittedly not a lot of clear screen time to determine specifics). One probably bear hugged her while she was trying to hole up and she got away mostly intact.

Doodler
2012-Feb-02, 05:35 PM
What more appropriate thread for necromancy than this one? :D

http://theclicker.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/02/10299835-new-trailer-for-walking-dead-return-looks-bloody-good

New trailer for season 2.5 is up! Happy munching. :)

Paul Beardsley
2012-Feb-02, 06:49 PM
What more appropriate thread for necromancy than this one? :D

http://theclicker.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/02/10299835-new-trailer-for-walking-dead-return-looks-bloody-good

New trailer for season 2.5 is up! Happy munching. :)

Mutter. It's not available to view in the UK.

Jim
2012-Feb-03, 01:29 AM
Try http://bcove.me/ptx813mt

Paul Beardsley
2012-Feb-03, 03:08 PM
Try http://bcove.me/ptx813mt

Thanks for trying, Jim, but it gives the same message: "THE VIDEO YOU ARE TRYING TO WATCH CANNOT BE VIEWED FROM YOUR CURRENT COUNTRY OR LOCATION."

Doodler
2012-Feb-03, 04:26 PM
Thanks for trying, Jim, but it gives the same message: "THE VIDEO YOU ARE TRYING TO WATCH CANNOT BE VIEWED FROM YOUR CURRENT COUNTRY OR LOCATION."

Well, I can summarize as best I can. Starts with the final scene of the mid-finale with Rick putting down the former Sophie, then lotsa chaos of the folks being chased by walkers, a car accident, and the next to final clip is the real eyebrow raiser, Daryl looking into the camera aiming a pistol with the line "Goodbye, brother".

The big debate is whether it's the actual return of Merle or something more metaphorical.

Paul Beardsley
2012-Feb-03, 04:28 PM
Thanks, Doodler. Sounds intriguing!

HenrikOlsen
2012-Feb-03, 11:58 PM
Thanks for trying, Jim, but it gives the same message: "THE VIDEO YOU ARE TRYING TO WATCH CANNOT BE VIEWED FROM YOUR CURRENT COUNTRY OR LOCATION."
Welcome to what the rest of us see when trying to get Dr. Who (or anything else) from the BBC.

Being outside both the US and UK I have no sympathy for either of you on this issue as you gets1 to see half of what I can't.


1) Yes Gilllian, I know it's wrong, it just felt right(ish).

Paul Beardsley
2012-Feb-05, 11:23 AM
Welcome to what the rest of us see when trying to get Dr. Who (or anything else) from the BBC.

Being outside both the US and UK I have no sympathy for either of you on this issue as you gets1 to see half of what I can't.


1) Yes Gilllian, I know it's wrong, it just felt right(ish).

Wow, I've been so selfish! I feel like a... a... a burglar who's just been burgled! Or someone who leaves half his dinner while watching a documentary about starving children.

Okay, so you've not been able to get anything on Doctor Who. Let me help. In 1963, two school teachers, Ian and Barbara, are puzzled about their pupil Susan, who appears to have advanced knowledge about some things while being terribly ignorant about mundane things. They follow her home one foggy night to 76 Totters Lane where they discover her eccentric grandfather, the Doctor, lives in a police box which is bigger on the inside than 12,000 word summary of Doctor Who from 1963 to Christmas 2011 snipped.

Paracelsus
2012-Feb-06, 02:58 PM
Watched it, and yes, it does look intriguing. Looks like things come to a head between Rick and Shane at some point during Season 2.

Jim
2012-Feb-13, 12:52 PM
The new half-season premiered last night. Highlights...

Dale's on to Shane.

Glen's life just got complicated.

Herschel has a Great Awakening.

Lori is a bad driver.

Two new characters are introduced, briefly.

Rick is good!

Doodler
2012-Feb-20, 04:18 AM
After tonight's ep, I think Glen needs to be swatted about the braincase until it turns back on. There are worse things in life than having someone to live for, especially when you're just not trained to function in combat situations.

Jim
2012-Feb-21, 12:45 PM
Yeah, someone needs to take Glen aside for a little talk. He froze his first time in a real gunfight. But he came through in the end.

And wasn't it great how Shane saved Lorie the burden of telling everyone - including Carl - that she's expecting? He's such a thoughful gentleman.

Someone said Shane will keep the group alive. I disagree. Shane will keep Lorie and Carl alive, even if it means sacrificing the rest of the group. (See "Otis, use of.")

Now... what to do with the newcomer?

jamesabrown
2012-Feb-21, 03:39 PM
After tonight's ep, I think Glen needs to be swatted about the braincase until it turns back on. There are worse things in life than having someone to live for, especially when you're just not trained to function in combat situations.

Too true. Plus, I can think of few things that would melt a woman's heart more than telling her, "My life was in danger, and all I could think of was you." Yet he feels he must don the cloak of self-imposed ostracism for it?

Fazor
2012-Feb-21, 04:03 PM
Yet he feels he must don the cloak of self-imposed ostracism for it?

Gotta keep in mind that for this groups journey . . . even preceding where the story picked up with Rick finding them . . . Glen was that "go-to" guy who could be counted on to scout, scavenge, and have anyone's back when they need it. He wasn't the overly aggressive type, but he was the kind of guy you could always count on. Then, suddenly, he couldn't count on himself to watch out for his friends.

It freaked him out. I don't think it's a long-term thing, but for someone who could always count on himself to put others first, he suddenly found himself frozen. I thought it was a good scene, and will lead to some character evolution, but I don't think it's a permanent change in his character.

Besides, what are the chances of finding another girl that cute in an apocalyptic zombie filled wasteland? Glen will come around. ;)

Rhaedas
2012-Feb-27, 05:23 PM
Well, also note that Walkers don't eat eachother. They seem to prefer living things. So, if a single walker was eating a person, it'd likely grow "cold" and "dead" before the walker got very far. It's just one mouth.

But a rabid pack of walkers could totally tear apart something while it's still "warm."

Getting back to that, in one of the last episodes (#9 or #10? I just did a marathon catch up last night) Rick shot a walker who fell on him, and he stayed under it hidden until the group went past after Shane. It's not the first time that tactic's been used. I wonder if they could get some thermal suits or something if they could be "invisible" to the walkers. I guess from a plot point of view you don't want it too easy.

Rhaedas
2012-Feb-27, 05:36 PM
I'm curious, in the comic book, did they ever give an explanation as to how the plague started?

I'm wondering if maybe there was a group of scientists tinkering with resurrection and/or attempting to end aging and the experiment went awry and breached containment in the lab.

Haven't seen the comic, and so far have been good to not dive in and possibly ruin it for the series for me. Part of me wants to know too, but another thinks that it might be one of those things that is better off left a mystery, or a number of rumors that are heard about but not ever verified. Besides, if the CDC guy didn't know...he sure made it seem like it was a sudden event with no time to figure anything out.

Fazor
2012-Feb-27, 05:48 PM
Haven't seen the comic, and so far have been good to not dive in and possibly ruin it for the series for me. Part of me wants to know too, but another thinks that it might be one of those things that is better off left a mystery, or a number of rumors that are heard about but not ever verified. Besides, if the CDC guy didn't know...he sure made it seem like it was a sudden event with no time to figure anything out.

On last night's episode, it was cool to see Shane kind of break down and talk about the outbreak even if just vaguely. "It started off as just a few weird stories on the news, and before we knew it, everything had gone to hell." and "I was there with you in the hospital, and then the military came in and started shooting everyone. Not walkers, but people. And then the walkers came." etc etc.

I'm interested to see how Shane's character reacts after last night's episode.

Doodler
2012-Feb-28, 02:38 PM
On last night's episode, it was cool to see Shane kind of break down and talk about the outbreak even if just vaguely. "It started off as just a few weird stories on the news, and before we knew it, everything had gone to hell." and "I was there with you in the hospital, and then the military came in and started shooting everyone. Not walkers, but people. And then the walkers came." etc etc.

I'm interested to see how Shane's character reacts after last night's episode.

I think we've gotten a little glimpse of light in what would otherwise appear to be a very blackened heart in Shane, especially when he made it clear he never "looked at Lorrie" prior to all hell breaking loose. I think it shows these two aren't all that different, its just that Rick was spared the trauma of surviving the breakdown of civilization, which colors Shane's point of view on life. Doesn't make Shane any easier to deal with, but it may be enough to have some cause to feel sympathy after the urge to throttle him passes after yet another of his episodes.

Rhaedas
2012-Feb-28, 02:51 PM
its just that Rick was spared the trauma of surviving the breakdown of civilization

Just have to say that the transition for Rick in the very first episode from pre- to post-collapse was brilliantly done. Especially if you didn't know what was going to happen.

Fazor
2012-Feb-28, 04:06 PM
I think we've gotten a little glimpse of light in what would otherwise appear to be a very blackened heart in Shane, especially when he made it clear he never "looked at Lorrie" prior to all hell breaking loose. I think it shows these two aren't all that different, its just that Rick was spared the trauma of surviving the breakdown of civilization, which colors Shane's point of view on life. Doesn't make Shane any easier to deal with, but it may be enough to have some cause to feel sympathy after the urge to throttle him passes after yet another of his episodes.

The thing is, as much as I think Rick is mad at Shane for everything, they seem to still portray him with a sense of brotherhood for him. Hell, he's often the only one sticking up for Shane. I think Shane's willingness to kill the "outsider" finally tipped Rick for a moment, but it seemed to be when he looked at the dead walkers in uniform and realized that these were probably two partners who died together it brought him back.

Regardless, I liked the direction of the episode. But that's not surprising, since I like the direction most of the episodes go. Otherwise I wouldn't keep watching. :)

ETA: Also, I loved that Shane got a glimpse of Rick and the other guy "doing what it takes to survive" and walking off with him trapped in the bus, before coming back to save him. Now that Rick's "hero" attitude actually saved Shane's life, do you think that will change Shane's opinion any? I mean, had Rick acted how Shane says he "should" act, Shane would be dead.

Paul Beardsley
2012-Feb-28, 05:35 PM
Argh, I think you're all an episode ahead again.

Incidentally, did anyone think the first episode after the gap was just a repeat of the conversations we'd had in this thread?

Fazor
2012-Feb-28, 05:47 PM
Argh, I think you're all an episode ahead again.

Incidentally, did anyone think the first episode after the gap was just a repeat of the conversations we'd had in this thread?

Yeah. It was kinda disappointing in that nothing "big" happened, but at the same time, it was necessary and . . . fulfilling? . . . as it really established the position they were all in.

Doodler
2012-Feb-29, 01:36 PM
ETA: Also, I loved that Shane got a glimpse of Rick and the other guy "doing what it takes to survive" and walking off with him trapped in the bus, before coming back to save him. Now that Rick's "hero" attitude actually saved Shane's life, do you think that will change Shane's opinion any? I mean, had Rick acted how Shane says he "should" act, Shane would be dead.

I think the best you'll get from them is a cease fire. With only three eps left in the season and the Governor cast for next season, I'm betting the next three eps will see Rick and Shane find an uneasy equilibrium until a new major opponent shows Shane the man he really wants to be. That'll probably shock him back to the "light", as it were.

Doodler
2012-Feb-29, 01:46 PM
http://www.craveonline.com/tv/interviews/183811-norman-reedus-on-the-walking-dead

Significant spoiler alert! Interview with Norman Reedus (Daryl), bigtime spoiler in his last answer. You have been warned.

Rhaedas
2012-Feb-29, 03:06 PM
http://www.craveonline.com/tv/interviews/183811-norman-reedus-on-the-walking-dead

Significant spoiler alert! Interview with Norman Reedus (Daryl), bigtime spoiler in his last answer. You have been warned.

You know, nothing surprises me in this show any more. I did one of those classic Mal Reynold's "Huh."

AKONI
2012-Feb-29, 11:22 PM
http://www.craveonline.com/tv/interviews/183811-norman-reedus-on-the-walking-dead

Significant spoiler alert! Interview with Norman Reedus (Daryl), bigtime spoiler in his last answer. You have been warned.

Yeah, I knew that was going to happen. It's the way television works.



As for the Mayor, someone put a spoiler on another website, but this was something I didn't want to know about... Then again it's a spoiler from the comics and anyone who has read some of the comics will tell you there are vast differences at times between the two story lines.

Van Rijn
2012-Mar-01, 09:01 AM
This is a spoiler thread, but still,

*Spoiler warning* if you haven't seen the latest episode.




One bit in the show made me cringe, not because I'm squeamish, but because it struck me as incredibly dangerous: Rick cut his hand with a knife to produce blood for the zombie. That seems ill-considered in a world with limited medical care, but worse, I thought they had established this stuff acted like a transmissible disease? Yet he used the same knife he cut himself with on the zombie . . . That bit broke my suspension of disbelief. As a desperation move it might make sense, but things weren't desperate at that point.

Rhaedas
2012-Mar-01, 03:03 PM
I think I've commented on this before, in the Atlanta scene where they used body parts to mask themselves so they could get across the streets, they seemed awfully careful not to get anything on them, which makes sense. But since then, they've gotten a bit careless with splatters and knives and like you said, cross-contamination. Which is fine if they somewhere figured out that it's *only* bites that transmit for some odd reason.

But then in the latest when the two guards that came up to the fence, a comment was made that they didn't have any bites, and maybe they got "scratched". Well, wait, so all these really close encounters everyone's had where everyone got away without being bit...I guess they got really lucky and didn't get scratched either, even with limbs flailing away?

I'm not going to say it ruins things for me, it's just one of those convenience rules to make the plot work, but hey, stick with something.

AKONI
2012-Mar-03, 12:38 AM
But then in the latest when the two guards that came up to the fence, a comment was made that they didn't have any bites, and maybe they got "scratched". Well, wait, so all these really close encounters everyone's had where everyone got away without being bit...I guess they got really lucky and didn't get scratched either, even with limbs flailing away?



Wait... I might have missed something. I thought the two they were talking about they simply stumbled past and were not the ones they knifed at the fence.

That confused me a bit as well. Did they have bullet wounds to their heads? I can't recall seeing any. I'm trying to figure out if they were simply dead or Walkers who are now fully dead.

Rhaedas
2012-Mar-03, 02:25 AM
Watching that part again, I think they were the same ones. They were definitely walkers, and Rick responds to Shane not seeing bites, "Got to be scratches then". Seemed to be put there as commentary for a reason, maybe later on?

Fazor
2012-Mar-03, 03:27 AM
Watching that part again, I think they were the same ones. They were definitely walkers, and Rick responds to Shane not seeing bites, "Got to be scratches then". Seemed to be put there as commentary for a reason, maybe later on?

Yeah, I was really expecting some new hints that the plague may be spreading differently and/or evolving from how they seem to think it is. Still think they were setting *something* up for later.

Paul Beardsley
2012-Mar-03, 08:09 PM
I've caught up now. I'd like it if they could be a bit clearer on how it spreads.

A couple of negative thoughts:

The walkers don't have "personalities" in the way the zombies in the original Dawn of the Dead did. In Dawn, it felt as if a range of diverse people had been unexpectedly zombified whilst in the middle of whatever it was they were doing. There's something oddly uniform about the walkers, both in their appearance and the growly noise they make.

The "human drama" is not interesting enough to make the series thrilling. This one had two parallel stories of people having to cross the line before they could come back and find some kind of balance. Granted, it's more interesting than one episode when everybody took it in turns to say how they felt about God and churches, but it's a bit bland.

I still enjoy it, but I don't count they days till the next one.

Jim
2012-Mar-05, 12:44 PM
So, now we know what the "Sorry, Brother" scene was all about.

No spoilers, just an observation. This episode started slow, with lots of character interaction... some surprising. Glen and Hershel's scene was a bit of a diversion from the plot line, but it was a definite "feel good" moment.

But when it got to the action stuff, it delivered.

jamesabrown
2012-Mar-05, 01:24 PM
Indeed, quite a sad and unexpected ending.

I still can't decide where I fall in the debate. I'm inclined to think I would opt for driving the guy out of town and leaving him somewhere, although that *might* be just as much of a death sentence as a clean bullet in the brain case. The objections raised--"You barely made it back last time, what if the car breaks down," etc--seem to be trivial compared to ending a human life.

But with the group's conscience out of the picture, is the debate over?

Oh, and I expect Carl will be dealing with some guilt issues in future episodes. At least I hope he does. If he doesn't, then he may be turning sociopathic from PTSD.

Fazor
2012-Mar-05, 03:29 PM
Certainly another emotional ending . . . although at this point it feels like they're cheating because it's so easy to do.

They're in a bad spot with the captive. Whether or not he could have been trusted before, now that the kid knows they're at least considering killing him, and now that he's been tortured and interrogated, how could the kid ever trust the group even if they decided to keep him around? And because he mentioned that he knows Molly from school, and given the account of his group's "search party" coming across the man and his daughters . . . do you really want him out in the wild? Even if he doesn't seek out the other group, who's to say they couldn't find him and torture him to get the information about Hershall's farm and the group?

It's quite a pickle.

AKONI
2012-Mar-05, 06:38 PM
Carl needs a good old fashioned spanking, because talking to him isn't working.

Dale simply got on my nerves. Society is gone, the old rules no longer apply and new rules need to be put in place. When an outsider threatens the group the outsider must be eliminated - period. If an outsider does not threaten the group the outsider should be allowed to join so he can be protected and in turn help support the group. This guy ran with a bunch of sadistic gang rapists, and while he may or may not have participated he is a threat. In a situation like this it's difficult to give someone like this the benefit of the doubt, because if you're wrong you die.

AMC has slashed the budget for the show, which is why we're seeing fewer Zombies this season. They actually suggested they could cut down on costs if we didn't see the zombies, but heard them instead so they wouldn't have to spend money on makeup.

AMC seems intent on destroying their most profitable show. Hopefully it won't go the way of Heroes.

Fazor
2012-Mar-05, 07:38 PM
Carl needs a good old fashioned spanking, because talking to him isn't working.
Maybe it makes me a soulless jerk, but I was really hoping Carl would get bit when he wandered off in the woods. Tara insists he's "Just a kid", but he hasn't learned from any of his past mistakes. At least it seems like he may finally understand actions have consequence. If only we could say that for some of the other characters.


AMC has slashed the budget for the show, which is why we're seeing fewer Zombies this season. They actually suggested they could cut down on costs if we didn't see the zombies, but heard them instead so they wouldn't have to spend money on makeup.
This hasn't bothered me too much though. They still show walkers, and there's still been groups of them, just many more instances of single walkers or small groups. And when they've shown them, they've still gone all out (walker in the well, Rick shooting a hole in the back of one walkers head so he could stick the gun through and shoot the other one, walker's face being scrapped off as it desperately sticks it's head through the broken windshield to get at Lorie, etc.)


AMC seems intent on destroying their most profitable show. Hopefully it won't go the way of Heroes.
It'll be a balancing act - TWD was AMC's first original show, so it's a huge money pit even given it's popularity. Hopefully they're realize that it's worth losing some money on it to build the channel's brand. So far, the smaller budget hasn't bothered me at all. The question will be whether they continue to slash it.

AKONI
2012-Mar-05, 08:23 PM
Maybe it makes me a soulless jerk, but I was really hoping Carl would get bit when he wandered off in the woods. Tara insists he's "Just a kid", but he hasn't learned from any of his past mistakes. At least it seems like he may finally understand actions have consequence. If only we could say that for some of the other characters.

I get that the kid is becoming jaded. Just look at children his age who are raised in the ghetto, but I have to agree with you. I was sort of hoping he would get bit as well. The days of the "lets give him a time out" are over.



It'll be a balancing act - TWD was AMC's first original show, so it's a huge money pit even given it's popularity. Hopefully they're realize that it's worth losing some money on it to build the channel's brand. So far, the smaller budget hasn't bothered me at all. The question will be whether they continue to slash it.

Yep, I have no problem with character development and fewer zombies because then when something happens it's even more dramatic, but I am concerned with how far this slashing might go.

Doodler
2012-Mar-06, 02:10 AM
Man, what a way to go :(

Fazor
2012-Mar-06, 03:13 AM
Man, what a way to go :(

I think Tara and I both audibly gasped "No!" when it happened. :( Great twist -- even if not all that surprising -- but it still sucked. Think he did a great job of acting through facial expression there too.

Jim
2012-Mar-06, 01:00 PM
There's a 30 min program that comes on Sunday night after The Walking Dead called Talking Dead on which they, well, talk about the series and the latest episode. (Catch it if you can. They have some interesting guests and provide some background/details to the action.)

This time they had the director of the episode. He is good friends with the actor who plays Dale, so it was a bittersweet episode for him. The final scenes were shot over two nights.

They also ran an on-line poll about Randall's fate. They asked, when Carl came into the barn, what should Rick have done?
a. Send Carl out, then shoot Randall.
b. Shoot Randall in front of Carl.
c. Don't shoot Randall, keep him a prisoner.
d. Shoot Shane.

Option d won with 43%.

jamesabrown
2012-Mar-06, 02:50 PM
That's funny. The percentage would have been closer to 100% among people living in my house.

Fazor
2012-Mar-06, 03:43 PM
I really thought Shane would have been a little changed after the events of the prior episode. Frustratingly, that doesn't seem to be the case.

phunk
2012-Mar-06, 04:51 PM
TWD was AMC's first original show

That's not right is it? According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMC_%28TV_channel%29#Programming), there were 10 others before it, most notibly Breaking Bad and Mad Men.

BigDon
2012-Mar-06, 05:23 PM
I've seen every episode and finally the last one got the old Game Refferee in me to rise up.

If this was one of my games it would have had a different set of crisis...crise...issues.

One, the show's writers don't seem to know what life without antibiotics was like. That leg wound would have killed the new guy in a week, tops. nor would he have been a threat at any time during the miserable process of dying of infection.

Yeah they had SOME antibiotics but not nearly enough for the wounded boy AND this renegade bandit.

Two, the writers are strictly citified boys.

Neither side, the characters nor the renegades would need a traitor to find the other party.

"Hey Daryl, where do you suppose that smoke is coming from?"

As the renegades didn't seem to have the self-discipline to practice smoke security and the characters sure as heck weren't..

As there is no other industry, the farm's generator would be heard for what it was miles away. And on a calm day its smoke would rise bright blue and straight up.

and the renegades themselves. From their origins, that's too big a group to be that sour.

I defy you to find a *random* sampling of thirty armed men who would allow what the wounded smuck said the "other guys" did.

That's one thing about guns. Nobody in the group is "bigger" than anybody else. Especially with the medical profession dead and gone.

That would have been the end of the large group. It would have been much more broken than Dales gawdaweful whining about their, literally, pathetic little party.

As for one reason, there would be party members taking shots at each other.

Fazor
2012-Mar-06, 05:28 PM
That's not right is it? According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMC_%28TV_channel%29#Programming), there were 10 others before it, most notibly Breaking Bad and Mad Men.

Sorry, first original series produced in-house. At least, that's what I had read. Without clicking through all the individual links on the wiki-article I didn't confirm it further than checking TWD itself.

Jim
2012-Mar-06, 05:58 PM
I've seen every episode and finally the last one got the old Game Refferee in me to rise up.

If this was one of my games it would have had a different set of crisis...crise...issues. ...

The dead have risen and are preying on the living, and this stuff bothers you?

BigDon
2012-Mar-06, 06:58 PM
The dead have risen and are preying on the living, and this stuff bothers you?

Tsk! That I should live so long as to hear such a thing from a Texan!

Jim, I've run at least three long running zombie apocali games in the past, with no complaints. :)

One of the best ones I pulled on my players...

I used some old siege condition rules and in one of the neighboring redoubts they were visiting to see about setting up some sort of trade, travel and mutual protection system they were some "ill" folks.

I tried to make the symptoms obvious!

Folks were falling sick and prostrating really fast and growing large, soft purple masses in their armpits, sternum and groins the size of plover's eggs.

And these fools are cutting into the recently dead with their combat cutlery looking for alien larva of some sort.

Their reasoning was since the dead are rising and preying on the living, all bets are off on what constitutes reality and looking for aliens larva wasn't unreasonible.

They obviously needed Grant Hutchensen in their party.

Less than a game month later all the redoubts had collapsed and there were no survivors.

Due to the fact that this was a General Rising, no bites on the recently dead are needed for them to resurrect, though their bites were contageous.

I had made a list of eight zombie rising characteristics that I could randomize so no two apocili were the same.

For instance the Left For Dead series isn't a rising of the dead, but a horrible neuro-plague.

The Dead Island on the other hand IS a rising of the dead. I really hated the early levels before you get guns.

Felt like serial killer training having to put down female zombies in bikinis with blunt weapons, as you actually have to beat the zombies down and smash in their skulls.

BUT the game is full of small pockets of the living who need your help.

Including the big church. And I confess to over immersing when that women appealed to me because of her diabetic daughter. I found myself spending hours in a zombie infested slum fighting my way to the closest pharmacy to retrieve the diabetic supplies, because my own daughter has Type 1 diabetes.

AKONI
2012-Mar-07, 04:42 AM
BigDon... I keep wondering why these people think it's okay to wander around at night. Olive Oil wanders off to take a prenancy test, Dale goes for a strole, Daryl seems content to sleep away from everyone at night, and NOBODY is thinking, "Hey, we need to make that fence around the property a little bit higher."

And why the hell hasn't anyone gone on a shopping spree at the local police headquarters to get more guns and ammo? Rick's hometown wasn't the only one with a police department.

What about home depot? Don't they need stuff there? Like more axes and other useful stuff?

I live in NYC so if there was a Zombie holocaust I'd be done for, but if I had access to an open area with a much MUCH lower population I'd have a plan.



And has anyone noticed that a Zombie holocaust seems to be the one type of civilization ending event that some people almost look forward to experiencing?

As if it would be fun?

jamesabrown
2012-Mar-07, 02:01 PM
I read in the introduction of one of the Walking Dead graphic novels, written by one of the writers, that zombies seem more 'conquerable' (not his word--the best I can come up with on the fly) than other monsters. They're slow, they don't employ weaponry or technology, they don't use creative thinking skills to capture prey. As long as you stay alert, don't let yourself get surrounded, and keep away from their hands and teeth, you can take out a dozen zombies with a mere baseball bat. So gung-ho surbuban-raised teenagers think that, yeah, if the biggest menace out there is a horde of shuffling mouth-breathers, I'd do aright.

Jim
2012-Mar-07, 05:17 PM
... a horde of shuffling mouth-breathers ...

And, since that's a pretty good description of most high schools, it's also a familiar environment for them.

Krel
2012-Mar-08, 03:22 AM
No one is using a .22lr firearm. The .22lr is the most common caliber in the U.S., and it has a low report and recoil, a lot lower than a .357 magnum! You can also carry a lot of .22 on you due to the small size of the cartridges. They are in the country, probably most homes would have a .22, Rick left a Ruger .22 rifle in the police station. Speaking of which, many Police departments have silenced .22 for dispatching dangerous animals with out alarming the public, or the inhabitants of drug houses. I've never been to a small town that doesn't have some type of gun shop, raid those. Although that maybe one of the reasons why the other group was in town. And those must be some pocket knives that can punch through a skull, I'm really impressed.

David.

Van Rijn
2012-Mar-08, 05:52 AM
Picky, picky, picky.

Heh. One of my biggest issues is that, given the limitations of these walkers, why isn't anybody wearing body armor? In a lot of stories, armor won't help much because any close contact would cause infection. Here, though, they can be covered in zombie gunk and it doesn't matter.


As long as you stay alert, don't let yourself get surrounded, and keep away from their hands and teeth, you can take out a dozen zombies with a mere baseball ball.

And with a shark suit, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark_suit)even the hands and teeth wouldn't do much. They shouldn't need nearly as tough a suit for a zombie, though. Even fairly simple improvised armor should be very useful.

publius
2012-Mar-08, 06:27 AM
Speaking of zombie killing ammunition, Hornady is having some fun with the Walking Dead craze:

http://www.hornady.com/ammunition/zombiemax

That's real ammunition, mind you. I'm tempted to buy a box just for novelty purposes, which is the idea.

phunk
2012-Mar-08, 03:17 PM
Picky, picky, picky.

Heh. One of my biggest issues is that, given the limitations of these walkers, why isn't anybody wearing body armor? In a lot of stories, armor won't help much because any close contact would cause infection. Here, though, they can be covered in zombie gunk and it doesn't matter.



And with a shark suit, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark_suit)even the hands and teeth wouldn't do much. They shouldn't need nearly as tough a suit for a zombie, though. Even fairly simple improvised armor should be very useful.

Seriously, even some leather would go a long way.

BigDon
2012-Mar-08, 03:29 PM
And has anyone noticed that a Zombie holocaust seems to be the one type of civilization ending event that some people almost look forward to experiencing?

As if it would be fun?

Another reason people think like that is its utter unlikeyness. So it's safe to fantasize about.

But as I tell the youngesters (30 year olds) watch it with:

"Wow, zombies are really scary. Just think how much more scarier Comanches or ancient Romans would be!"

And I get "Huh? They're not scary, they're just people!" as a reply.

Rhaedas
2012-Mar-08, 03:31 PM
Quite frankly, a bit of awareness of surroundings would keep a lot of the incidents down.

But there has to be some plot device to move the story along. I guess if they actually found a perfect safe place, it would be yet another reality show. With zombies at the door.

Wait, networks seem to like reality shows more than dramas. Maybe that could be a last resort.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Mar-09, 06:54 AM
Another reason people think like that is its utter unlikeyness. So it's safe to fantasize about.

But as I tell the youngesters (30 year olds) watch it with:

"Wow, zombies are really scary. Just think how much more scarier Comanches or ancient Romans would be!"

And I get "Huh? They're not scary, they're just people!" as a reply.
They don't understand that an enemy who can plan and have leaders who are better tacticians than anyone they've ever met (sorry BD) is something to be scared of?

BigDon
2012-Mar-10, 03:14 AM
Henrik, what I think they don't understand is the concept of an intractible enemy.

I mean jeez, all human beings are the same!

Aren't they?

geonuc
2012-Mar-10, 11:18 AM
At least this season seems to have picked up the quality from the abysmal fall episodes. I was about to give up on the show - it wasn't even fun to pick apart the stupidities. There were too many of them.

Rhaedas
2012-Mar-12, 04:54 AM
Pretty basic plot in number 12, although I have to say I sort of didn't expect what Rick did. But I guess things couldn't drag out even more without it really getting soap opera, and he probably figured that there was no way out anyway. The ending to the episode was great...I think we'll see some action next week.

AKONI
2012-Mar-12, 05:03 AM
Yeah, Shane and Rick reached the point of no return.

Jim
2012-Mar-12, 11:38 AM
I understand George Lucas is lobbying for a remake of the last episode. He thinks they should show Shane shooting first.

It does answer the question about the guards having no bite marks. That's actually more frightening than "any scratch will do it."

And notice who Rick put in charge in his absence.

jamesabrown
2012-Mar-12, 01:05 PM
Well my wife's happy. She's been shouting at Rick, "Shoot him. Shoot him!" for weeks. It's kind of disturbing, actually.

Once again my family and I are in confusion: what makes you a walker? We saw in this episode two ordinary corpses rise up hours later--or even a couple of minutes--as a walker. That tells me there's something in the air that has infected everyone, and that once you die you'll turn until there's enough brain damage to permanently end you. But my son was insisting that only some transmission from another walker, like a bite or scratch, will turn you. You get bit, you 'die' from some kind of infection, and then you stand back up and shuffle around. But the blond woman's sister was bitten and immediately died, whereas skinny bearded guy from Season One was bitten, and he appeared to be fine with the exception that everyone knew he was going to end up a walker eventually. I forget his fate.

So with Dale and Carl, the polar opposites of the group, now gone, will they keep the tension up? Next week's episode looks like it will be mostly a remake of The Alamo, and then we're off for several months to the next 'Season.' Presumably most if not all of the remaining cast will survive to move on to some other poorly-defendable location, but what the group's Shoulder Angel and Shoulder Devil no longer in the picture, what will everyone argue about?

Fazor
2012-Mar-12, 02:13 PM
So with Dale and [Shane], the polar opposites of the group, now gone, will they keep the tension up? Next week's episode looks like it will be mostly a remake of The Alamo, and then we're off for several months to the next 'Season.' Presumably most if not all of the remaining cast will survive to move on to some other poorly-defendable location, but what the group's Shoulder Angel and Shoulder Devil no longer in the picture, what will everyone argue about?

Do you think everyone will just accept what Rick did and keep listening to him as a leader with no contention? I think Glen and Darryl will, since they figured out what Shane had done on their own (presuming they can even survive to get back to the house. Seems like they're on the wrong side of a sea of walkers.)

As for transmission, Shane and (the hostage whose name I can never remember) were both in close contact with "walker juice." We know Shane's been in contact many times, and the hostage at least once in the school-yard. It could still be a blood/fluid transmitted disease, albeit one that can't take over until the living host is dead. Some/many die from their bites because they tend to bite and dig into vital organs. But it also explains why someone with a minor bite (like season one) won't instantly turn into a walker. He hadn't died yet.

They acted like he would turn to a walker at any moment (they left him with a gun to "end himself" if he so chose.) But they'd likely not understand the exact nature of the infection either.

Or, it's evolving.

I don't know. Don't really care. I like the show, and am willing to suspend realism (it is a zombie show, afterall!) in the sake of entertainment.

Doodler
2012-Mar-12, 02:50 PM
It seems they're definitely sticking with the graphic novel's stance that anyone that dies, reanimates, which is cool. It's also consistent with Romero undeath, which is bites kill and any one dead re-animates, regardless. It is an inconsistency that has already existed in the subgenre, so the decision to reveal this here with TWD is not in and of itself inconsistent. It IS fantasy, afterall, so 100% explicability isn't an absolute requirement.

Fazor
2012-Mar-12, 04:21 PM
It seems they're definitely sticking with the graphic novel's stance that anyone that dies, reanimates, which is cool. It's also consistent with Romero undeath, which is bites kill and any one dead re-animates, regardless. It is an inconsistency that has already existed in the subgenre, so the decision to reveal this here with TWD is not in and of itself inconsistent. It IS fantasy, afterall, so 100% explicability isn't an absolute requirement.

I'd add that the way they've been focusing on the "Hey, this walker doesn't have any bites" thing leads me to believe that they *are* going to explore that more in-depth at some point, but that we just haven't gotten to that point yet. It doesn't strike me as a "we're just doing it with no thought to plot consistency" thing.

whimsyfree
2012-Mar-13, 12:36 AM
Still don't understand the fascination with zombies.

Ditto. The idea seems vacuous to me. The concept seems oddly popular though. Maybe they should make a zombies versus vampires flick for maximum appeal.

Krel
2012-Mar-15, 03:43 AM
It seems they're definitely sticking with the graphic novel's stance that anyone that dies, reanimates, which is cool.

Not quite, there corpses in many of the cars on the interstate that showed no sighs of being shot or having head trauma. They were just dead.

David.

Rhaedas
2012-Mar-15, 04:29 AM
Not quite, there corpses in many of the cars on the interstate that showed no sighs of being shot or having head trauma. They were just dead.

David.

That's either oversight/sloppy writing or it means that the virus is changing to make it a bigger problem.

Fazor
2012-Mar-15, 01:56 PM
Or they were killed by some type of military toxin that destroys brain functionality. Or since they died in their cars, they hadn't been exposed to the virus. Or they were dead long enough before walkers came along, and the brain had degraded beyond the point of infection. Or any other reason we could come up with.

I really had expected them to explore more with those bodies, but the whole "Sophie running away, Carl getting shot" thing got in the way.

AKONI
2012-Mar-16, 02:41 AM
Well my wife's happy. She's been shouting at Rick, "Shoot him. Shoot him!" for weeks. It's kind of disturbing, actually.

Once again my family and I are in confusion: what makes you a walker? We saw in this episode two ordinary corpses rise up hours later--or even a couple of minutes--as a walker. That tells me there's something in the air that has infected everyone, and that once you die you'll turn until there's enough brain damage to permanently end you. But my son was insisting that only some transmission from another walker, like a bite or scratch, will turn you. You get bit, you 'die' from some kind of infection, and then you stand back up and shuffle around. But the blond woman's sister was bitten and immediately died, whereas skinny bearded guy from Season One was bitten, and he appeared to be fine with the exception that everyone knew he was going to end up a walker eventually. I forget his fate.



The blonde sister lost a lot of blood while the bearded guy just had a "flesh" wound.

He asked to be left by the side of the road.

publiusr
2012-Mar-16, 09:15 PM
Here is what I am thinking. The new source of conflict wil be Daryl, who wil be re-united with his brother Merle (now missing a hand) who will be revealed as the leader of the rival group. His character escaped for a reason. As the saying goes, "You can't show a gun in the first act without firing it in the third." And here are two loose cannons.

And while we are on the subject of pithy statements, here is a movie you might like to watch, called: The Kid Stays in the Picture" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kid_Stays_in_the_Picture

Nothing to do with zombies, I know, but the last few minutes feature a young Dustin Hoffman doing a dead-on impersonation of Robert Evans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_Rn8PjE2_k

Paul Beardsley
2012-Mar-17, 09:40 PM
Caught up again with you guys. I was pleasantly surprised to be surprised by the ending of episode 12.

There are some serious lapses in credibility, but it was well established that there's a huge range of possible times to go from dead to zombie.

I'm curious about the adherence to the original Romero rules - i.e. all recently dead return. This was established way back in 1968, and I'm a bit surprised the characters in Walking Dead didn't spend some time wondering about what the rules were. Given that people do tend to die from papercuts in post-apocalyptic worlds, you really would have to consider what happens next.

That's the real credibility gap with Walking Dead. People aren't thinking like survivors.

Paul Beardsley
2012-Mar-17, 09:49 PM
Ditto. The idea seems vacuous to me. The concept seems oddly popular though. Maybe they should make a zombies versus vampires flick for maximum appeal.

It's been done. They work better independently.

I understand that nothing works for everybody, but the idea of dead people coming back to life, and being a well-defined threat to the survivors, is an excellent concept. The rules are very simple: The recently dead come back and try to eat you. If you are bitten, you die, and you come back and try to eat people. You can kill a zombie for good by damaging its brain.

That's the scenario summed up in 36 words (although there are variants). We've had over four decades of stories based on this simple idea, some written by top-notch authors. If it doesn't work for you, then fair enough - as I said, nothing works for everyone.

But I wish I could come up with an idea that could be summed up in 36 words and spawn four decades of stories.

Rhaedas
2012-Mar-17, 10:12 PM
Haven't seen this mentioned, but a few days ago this comic spelled out one thing wrong with the series (NSFW). It's Carl. (http://rockpapercynic.com/index.php?date=2012-03-12)

Now, I don't think he's reached Wesley Crusher levels, but I would like to see Carl grow up or get a clue or something. He's getting a bit predictable.

Jim
2012-Mar-19, 12:02 PM
Okay, wow. And wow again. Talk about your season ending cliffhangers.

Fazor
2012-Mar-19, 01:25 PM
Okay, wow. And wow again. Talk about your season ending cliffhangers.
Yeah. The beginning was awesome, the rest of the episode was kinda ... well, nothing. Then the end? I want to know! Have to wait 'til fall? Noooooooo!

Jim
2012-Mar-19, 02:17 PM
Nothing? Glen declared his love for Maggie. Daryl and Carol (aww, poetic) shared a motorcycle ride. Rick asserted himself. Hershel had a great line, "Christ promised resurrection of the dead. I just thought he had something a little different in mind.”

The hooded figure is Michonne, a character from the graphics. Guess who her companions are?

Here's a blog on the episode. http://blog.chron.com/tubular/2012/03/the-walking-dead-beside-the-dying-fire/

Fazor
2012-Mar-19, 02:22 PM
I recognized Michonne by her sword, though I don't know much about her. And knew nothing about her "companions"

Paul Beardsley
2012-Mar-19, 02:35 PM
Okay, wow. And wow again. Talk about your season ending cliffhangers.

D'oh! This means I can't read any further until next week as you lot have evidently seen the finale.

Judging by the trailer, it looks like it's going to be a Night of the Living Dead!

I'll be rejoining you soon.

Doodler
2012-Mar-20, 12:44 PM
That's either oversight/sloppy writing or it means that the virus is changing to make it a bigger problem.

Now there's a fun possibility.

geonuc
2012-Mar-24, 09:31 AM
This past season has been much better than the previous - a lot less of the badly-acted agonizing over the plight of the group and a lot more zombie killing.

However, the stupidities continue. The finale illustrates another one - why on earth wouldn't someone in the group be doing map research on what is around the area? Their welcome at the farm was tenuous for quite some time, so it had to occur to someone to start thinking about where to go next. And that doesn't even speak to having a ready escape plan at all times.

I really do think the series would be more enjoyable if the writers embraced the concept of human intelligence.

publiusr
2012-Mar-24, 06:17 PM
The thing that got me was that no one did the old "If we all get separated, meet at point X and leave a note"

Frankly I would have suggested that they bug out until the herd passes, then return to the farm.

Jim
2012-Mar-24, 09:05 PM
Well, if you're all together and you have a reasonably safe place to go, that's a definite option.

They were missing five of their number, and they had no "safe house" lined up.

They had a pretty good spot. Maybe they should have fortified it more and earlier, but I don't think they figured on a major migration.

(Speaking of which, did the helicopter lead/drive the herd to the farm?)

And as for not thinking of the prison, I'll bet there are lots of folks in Houston who don't know there's a prison 50 miles away. Or how many there are within 50 miles.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Mar-24, 09:42 PM
And as for not thinking of the prison, I'll bet there are lots of folks in Houston who don't know there's a prison 50 miles away. Or how many there are within 50 miles.
Don't people know that prisons are one of the major industries in Texas? With a quite heavy lobby working for longer sentences for more crimes?
With 44 thousand employees it's the second largest prison system in the US, second only to California.

Jim
2012-Mar-24, 11:53 PM
No.

TJMac
2012-Mar-25, 02:04 AM
I have to admit, I lost interest part way through the first season, mainly due to what I felt was just idiocy on the part of almost every character. I caught the last few episodes of this season... starting with the one before they shot all the "barn zombies".

So, I guess I missed a few rules. One of which must be, never turn and look around, to see if you are being snuck up on. Good grief, the insanity! Next, even though we know that noise attracts the walkers, (and maybe mobs of other NOT NICE humans) let us just fire away like crazy at any opportunity.

Who ever thought that a simple wooden farmhouse, and outlying buildings, with a few fences, was some sort of secure location? I'm aghast at the stupidity of it.

Other plot developments I have trouble with:

Ok, so, we have made this old man and his daughters mad at us. Even tho we are a much larger group made up of several alpha males and some very competent women, we will have to leave the farm and go out to die, because they tell us we have to. Huh?

Wife to husband, about guy she was cheating with. He is a problem, you have to do something. Later, hey, I did something, he is no longer a problem. Wife acts like she just saw him set a preschool on fire. Huh?

I grew up in a big family. Any time we went anywhere, we established the meet up point. If we get separated, meet here by the Flagpole at noon. Not one person in the group ever ever ever thought, hey, it's possible we could be separated and need to hook up with each other again?

I am opposed to guns, but I will carry this one around always, but never have it ready to use, and will die with it on my shoulder in an unused state. Huh? (lets go for a walk in the dark, ALONE, while zombies are about!) Mama always said, stupid is as stupid does.

Lets save this guy who tried to kill us. Let's kill him. Let's not. Let's take him out to the country and throw a stick, and leave him behind. (this is because we want him dead, but dont have the testicular fortitude to just DO IT)

Why dont I just blurt out a story about mass rape, when no one is asking me about it? Wait, they already think I led a small quasi military group here from Jersey, just to find this farm? Oh, shoot, I should have kept protesting my innocence.

We must not ever ever try to loot the cars on the highways for things of value. (like gasoline) We must not hide INSIDE a vehicle while zombies walk by. We must just hide and scurry about out of sight.

We should have a lot of loud arguments while not knowing whats in the dark around us.

Frankly, at the end, I would have shot Rick and walked away on my own. Guy is an idiot. He just spent all this time taking votes, and NOW suddenly its "my way or the highway". Only good thing I saw him do was to put the two guys in the bar down.

I have a total of zero real military experience, and compared to this lot, I would be Alexander the Great.

YMMV

TJ

Van Rijn
2012-Mar-25, 03:36 AM
Yes, my biggest issue with the show is the lack of tactical thinking. I've already mentioned armor: Body armor would be a good idea both because of the zombies and other people, and I'd think improvised armor would be so obvious everyone would be wearing it. Also, sound makers would be very useful as distraction. For instance, if you want to get a group of zombies to move somewhere else you could use a wind up clock and set the alarm for some appropriate time. Or keep a few noisemakers handy, so in an attack, you could throw, say, chattering teeth in one direction while you are moving in the other direction.

Or set a trap for the zombies: Set up a protected, loud noise maker (perhaps a siren) in a pit that the zombies couldn't climb out of. You could clear out large areas by setting up zombie traps.

I still like the show despite this, but I'd expect somebody would be thinking of these things. Maybe the helicopter represents that: Somebody might be using it as part of a zombie clearing operation.

geonuc
2012-Mar-25, 09:00 AM
And as for not thinking of the prison, I'll bet there are lots of folks in Houston who don't know there's a prison 50 miles away. Or how many there are within 50 miles.

Are these Houston folks caught up in a zombie apocalypse where their survival depends on having a place secure from walkers? Do the local Houston convenience stores have area maps that show prisons and the like?

It's not about the characters in the Walking Dead having prior knowledge of the Atlanta-area prisons and other potentially secure or secure-able facilities; it's about doing simple research when your life depends on it.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Mar-25, 09:29 AM
Wife to husband, about guy she was cheating with. He is a problem, you have to do something. Later, hey, I did something, he is no longer a problem. Wife acts like she just saw him set a preschool on fire. Huh?
Isn't that just classical clichéed TV writing. AKA she'd distancing herself from any guilt that may be associated with the acts she caused.

Fazor
2012-Mar-25, 10:31 AM
Who ever thought that a simple wooden farmhouse, and outlying buildings, with a few fences, was some sort of secure location? I'm aghast at the stupidity of it.


This gets brought up a lot, probably because they didn't do a *great* job focusing on it. The farm was more secure than most places because it is surrounded by bogs that trapped walkers who weren't smart enough to get around them. Unfortunately, those bogs started to dry up and were no longer an obstacle.

That said, I'd imagine that there's a "dry season" every year and so they should have been expecting that. And I think I'd still prefer further fortification. But realistically, what could they do? Wouldn't have the materials to build a high, secure wall around the place. Could have boarded the heck out of the house, but as mentioned, that only serves to trap yourselves inside, and then what?

TJMac
2012-Mar-25, 04:50 PM
Pick one building, or make a new secure one out of heavy lumber, bricks, dig a moat and use the dirt to make a wall. Put in firing slots, so you can shoot out. Your primary concern is the not intelligent walkers. Keep it stocked with ammo, guns and water. With a clear field of fire, you can sit inside and shoot zombies all day.

Plan on HAVING to defend yourself. HOPE you don't have to. All the time they spent dithering about the kid who needed executing, could have been dealt with by leaving him in the first place, and instead of whining and crying about all the trivial nonsense, they could have built something worth holding onto.

What's the timeline by the end of the show, second season? How long (their time) since it all started? Even if it's only months, by now they should have gotten to the place in their head where it is all about surviving now. I can't see myself being capable of just shooting people/walkers on a second's notice now, but if Ive spent months running and hiding and killing when I have to, it's going to come a lot easier.
I can accept a few things, for making a show carry on, but it feels to me like they take it to an extreme.

If it really is budget issues for the show, thats really a shame. (and mysterious, being its a top rated show)

TJ

Rhaedas
2012-Mar-25, 05:10 PM
If it really is budget issues for the show, thats really a shame. (and mysterious, being its a top rated show)

Well, that's network's for you.

Seems to me that if the goal is to have a way to take out walkers with headshots both quietly and with ammunition concerned, wouldn't going crossbows and bolts from wood make sense? Again, the main frustration with the series is how they establish rules in one, and then break them in another, and the whole "noise attracts walkers" and then letting off gunfire just doesn't make sense. Only in the farm evac, where all hell broke loose, but outside of that, silence elimination should be the focus, not going to the town to get more bullets.

publiusr
2012-Mar-25, 07:25 PM
(Speaking of which, did the helicopter lead/drive the herd to the farm?)

No, I wouldn't think so. Early on we saw that helicopter--from another episode, I believe. This was just a testimony to how aimless they were. The montage begins with them feeding on the horse we saw in the first season being finished off.




Or set a trap for the zombies: Set up a protected, loud noise maker (perhaps a siren) in a pit that the zombies couldn't climb out of. The ant-lion approach. perfect for a raptor pit too if we ever have a Jurassic Park.

Perfect for dealing with zombies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narco_tank
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/05/ford-super-duty-transformed-into-armored-narco-tank.html
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Narco-tank&id=56896F09A47ADBBC94F91D139F2E0A85B87E50D2&FORM=IQFRBA

Van Rijn
2012-Mar-25, 09:34 PM
That said, I'd imagine that there's a "dry season" every year and so they should have been expecting that. And I think I'd still prefer further fortification. But realistically, what could they do? Wouldn't have the materials to build a high, secure wall around the place. Could have boarded the heck out of the house, but as mentioned, that only serves to trap yourselves inside, and then what?

Set up a kill box in an entrance way, similar to old castles, by boarding up and reinforcing the entrance area. Make it very confined so the zombies have little room to move, and so you can poke things in on the side to hold them and cut them. Have an opening that limits the zombies that can get in, and where it is easy to have someone on the side push pointed rods to close off the opening. Deal with held zombies, put 'em in a wheelbarrow and cart them to a designated area, release the rods to allow another zombie in, repeat.

Another option: Have sound makers ready in different areas of the farm to draw them off. For instance, put a boom box in the upper area of the barn, and rig it so you can turn it on remotely. Also, if you have some people in the upper area of the barn, they can shoot zombies as they come into the barn.

If I were in that situation, I'd be spending a lot of my time thinking up different ways to protect myself from zombies and how to kill zombies.

Doodler
2012-Jul-14, 05:38 PM
Yes, my fellow Deadheads, this is thread necromancy at its finest. Though honestly, I can think of no more appropriate thread for it.
Season 3 announced and a new trailer is up. As always, MASSIVE spoilers therein. Enjoy!

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-walking-dead-season-3-trailer-released-at-comic-con-watch-the-full-video

Paul Beardsley
2012-Jul-14, 05:58 PM
Looks entertaining.

R.A.F.
2012-Jul-14, 06:33 PM
I lost interest when season 2 began, and the reason is fairly straightforward....

Too much talking/soap opera, not enough zombies.

Doodler
2012-Jul-16, 02:53 PM
If it were strictly zombie of the week, you'd be burned through in a season. Don't get me wrong, its been done before (BBC, no less, with Dead Air), but what TWD covers is as much what humans do to each other as much as what the dead would love to do to them. Even the comic is much the same, at least the 10 or so first issues I read (I heard it recently released issue #100). Its less a straightforward horror flick as it is a story that could be told against the backdrop of any other kind of collapse of civilization.

Paul Beardsley
2012-Jul-16, 05:41 PM
Its less a straightforward horror flick as it is a story that could be told against the backdrop of any other kind of collapse of civilization.

I thought the first season found a good balance between being about zombies and being about people. The second season not so much. At times it was less human drama and more soap opera, with painfully stupid behaviour displayed by too many characters - and occasionally the scriptwriters. (Somebody commented on the wisdom of rubbing your cut hand against something the zombies have been licking.) Actually it was surprising how many uninteresting ideas they managed to come up with.

Still, I have reasonably high expectations for the next season. I hope there's less talking - or, if they must talk at length, at least say something more interesting than the things we've all said in this thread!

HenrikOlsen
2012-Jul-17, 08:06 AM
Dis they even think to raid the antiques shops yet?