My Community

Children of the Sun => TV => Topic started by: nacho on March 30, 2010, 02:13:33 PM

Title: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 30, 2010, 02:13:33 PM
Walking Dead news...snore...

Quote
Great news! While the pilot episode has yet to even go behind cameras, AMC has already ordered six episodes of the live-action comic book adaptation of "The Walking Dead", which is slated to premiere this October on AMC. Based on Robert Kirkman's graphic novels, the project will be written and directed by Frank Darabont (Shawshank Redemption, The Mist). As we reported earlier, Jonny Lee Miller (Hackers, Dracula 2000, "Eli Stone") is in talks to play the lead role of Rick Grimes, with Jon Bernthal locked to star as Grimes' partner and friend Shane.
Title: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 24, 2010, 02:32:16 PM
Walking Dead Trailer!


http://livefeed.hollywoodreporter.com/2010/08/the-walking-dead-trailer-video.html#more-7052

Title: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 24, 2010, 02:35:32 PM
Here's the bootleg Youtube if that video gives you problems (which it does me)


Shit quality...but, still, I'm psyched.  Makes me want to re-read the (frequently awful) comics.

Premiere date is October...  More here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walking_Dead_%28TV_series%29

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 01, 2010, 12:57:43 PM
Okay, split this off from the PA TV thread because... It just got renewed for a second season.  Two months before it even premieres.

Crazy.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on September 01, 2010, 02:06:27 PM
The show looks cool, but the comic is sort of boring. I read a bout half of book one before my interest kind of petered out.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 01, 2010, 02:47:15 PM
The comic sucks.  From start to finish.  I got through the first 30 issues only because I had faith.  I hoped and prayed that it would pick up steam.  But...no.  It's bullshit.  And I'm going into the show with that condemnation in my heart...

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 05, 2010, 08:18:40 PM
A much better trailer:

http://blastr.com/2010/09/new-walking-dead-promo-sh.php

It's better because it tells you nothing about the story because this show is going to suck.  But maybe it'll be like True Blood and go on and on for years just so I can have my PA fix, no matter how bad it is.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 21, 2010, 05:21:24 PM
Nice...

(http://www.greatsociety.org/uploads/userfiles/3/21_walkingdead-clickable_560.jpg)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on September 21, 2010, 09:59:34 PM
The trailer does make it look really good and like it has a lot of heart.  I guess a lot depends on the lead actor, huh?  Plus, it's on AMC, home of Mad Men and Breaking Bad.  I'm gonna give it a shot even though I am SO OVER SUPERNATURAL CREATURE DRAMA. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 21, 2010, 10:03:17 PM
If they stick with the comics, it's more heavily on the survivors than the zombies.  You get zombies, zombies, zombies...then a group of survivors fucking up their own survival, then zombies zombies zombies, then a 20 issue arc where they're holed up in a fucking prison yelling at each other and going stir crazy. Then a magic zombie tamer comes through the horde surrounding the prison and...that's when I quit.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on September 29, 2010, 10:46:25 AM
Sounds like fun!

I'm gonna jump on this one, because I've shunned television for years so I need something upon which to wean myself.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 06, 2010, 02:07:39 PM
New trailer (which I can't access at work, and is not yet on Youtube):


http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/21929
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 14, 2010, 10:42:12 PM
Oh...so... Renewed for a second season, still three weeks from the premiere.  Hubris?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 01:40:25 PM
Whew... Working my way through the horrible comics.

Good news -- they get really good after 50 issues!  Of course, to get good, Kirkman has to kill off every major character except for the main guy, his kid, and the cool chick.  Then he has them meet the people who created the virus that started the plague. Then he copies Y and has them journey to DC to find a cure.

And then it gets bad again.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 01:49:19 PM
Oh, and, supposedly the first two episodes have leaked.  Nothing has showed up online yet, though...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 02:21:25 PM
Hmmm... So the death of 80% of the characters came in late 08.  And, in short order, they're replaced with standard characters -- the gung ho army guy, the beautiful sexpot dressed like Dawn Wells, and the super-secret know-it-all scientist.

Which says to me: Kirkman inked the TV deal and then dramatically changed his comic to be more about a typical TV cast as opposed to a mob of Everyman survivors eeking out a living.

50 issues they're stuck in place.  Then, suddenly, they're on the adventure of a lifetime with the crew from Stargate Atlantis.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on October 19, 2010, 07:24:14 PM
Nice...

(http://www.greatsociety.org/uploads/userfiles/3/21_walkingdead-clickable_560.jpg)

Holy shit... that's Atlanta!!!! :D
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:21:39 PM
Yeah, the first part of Walking Dead is set in Atlanta (our hero is a small town KY or TN cop or something, but the government was evacing people to Atlanta, so he wakes up in the hospital and goes right for Atlanta first thing after some minor shenanigans).  Then they're at a prison outside of Atlanta, then they head to Kentucky and start their journey to DC.

The first episode has leaked and I'll have it in 15 minutes.  I'm actually going to watch it tonight -- Got me a Dr. Pepper and ready to go.

AND it's taking priority over Stargate Universe... Just to prove how excited I am for PA TV.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:23:50 PM
39 seconds....20 seconds...and... Liveblog of the Walking Dead pilot starts now!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:29:01 PM
First minute -- hey, it's Maximum Overdrive!

Also, Rick's already a deeper, better, more interesting character than he's been in 64 issues of the shitty comic.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:32:34 PM
Right.  I'm already sold.  We don't start in the hospital (ripping off 28 Days Later), we start with a little girl zombie.  Nice.

And the zombies are good.  The right blend of shuffling and moving just a little too quickly for comfort.  Not runners, and not Romero stumblers.  Just plain evil.

The make up on the fucking zombies... Whew!  This is beautiful. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:33:29 PM
Title sequence is great!  It's like zombie apocalypse Treme!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:35:13 PM
Man...it's like someone read the comics and said, hey, Kirkman, if you weren't such a shit writer, HERE'S what you could have done.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on October 19, 2010, 11:39:57 PM
Man, this sounds awesome.  Guess I'll have to check it out.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:40:21 PM
What's great is knowing what's going to happen to poor fucking Rick and now watching a human being play him.  In the stupid comics, the shit he goes through is...well, inhuman.  Terrible.  How the hell are they going to translate that to the screen?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:44:16 PM
The post-titles "flashback" (how Rick ends up in the hospital) is great, too.  Shane's character was a big problem in the comics because none of that shit made sense.  Here, you hate Shane from the get-go.  And the whole chase sequence is great.  This shit is loaded with PA homage, too.  Lot's of Stand nods in the flashback.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:45:32 PM
Bear McCreary is the music man!  Awesome! And, yeah, that BSG feel is there in the music even by the 10 minute mark.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:48:48 PM
15 minutes in.  This show's fucking awesome.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2010, 11:52:36 PM
And...hospital wake up.  Somehow written and shot in a way that does not make you think of 28 Days Later, even though it's exactly the same.  They took all the cool shit from that whole wake up sequence and made it feel weirdly original. (Thanks mainly to borrowing from the original Day of the Triffids, where Bill Mason's confusion upon waking up to the apocalypse takes an entire episode to sort out.)

In fact, yes, it is an the 80's Day of the Triffids wake up.  Which was brilliant and powerful and tense as all hell.

Beautiful.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on October 19, 2010, 11:58:49 PM
Dammit!  Demonoid doesn't have it up yet.  What channel is this on?  I might be able to set the DVR.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:01:27 AM
Wow.  Gruesome half-eaten corpse shots are more upsetting than in the comics.  And the hospital set is like something out of Aliens.  Small arms fire, Ripley!

The zombie reveal... Yes.  Perfect. Followed by retardo darkened stairwell escape.  Oh, the footsteps of Stu Redmond... We've seen the dark stairwell shocker many times before.

But even all the idiot cliches feel somehow organic.  He runs into the stairwell because of the zombie reveal and it makes sense. And turns out fine, anyway, even though you're biting your nails as soon as he does it.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:01:50 AM
Dammit!  Demonoid doesn't have it up yet.  What channel is this on?  I might be able to set the DVR.

I posted it in the secret forums.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:04:00 AM
Holy shit the zombie makeup.  This shit is fucking off the chain.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:07:44 AM
Rick's quiet potential insanity, which is clumsily handled in the comics, is wonderfully done as well.  And Bear is doing the music with that dreamy mix of BSG coolness and tense Dark Knight style relentlessness.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:12:49 AM
Sound drawing the zombies is dealt with right away (as opposed to issue fucking 54 in the stupid comics). 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:14:55 AM
I like that the Jericho guy is playing Morgan.  Is he now the first actor to star in two PA TV shows?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:18:46 AM
Hooooly shit. I just had to turn on the lights after Morgan's zombie wife crept up onto his porch and tried the door. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 12:32:25 AM
So.  That was fucking awesome.

And now it's bedtime. Where I'll dream about the zombie apocalypse.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 08:18:11 AM
And...hospital wake up.  Somehow written and shot in a way that does not make you think of 28 Days Later, even though it's exactly the same.

Psst. Walking Dead came before 28 Days Later.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 08:57:50 AM
And...hospital wake up.  Somehow written and shot in a way that does not make you think of 28 Days Later, even though it's exactly the same.

Psst. Walking Dead came before 28 Days Later.

Psst!  No it didn't!  28 Days Later was 2002, Walking Dead started in late 2003.

The US release was 2003, but anyone on the festival circuit, or downloading, or in the UK, saw it a year before.  Or, even if Kirkman did see it for the first time in 03, it came out in June and Walking Dead came out the following November.

And, anyway, it's all stolen from Day of the Triffids.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 08:19:32 PM
By the way -- I don't really care if scenes or whatever are ripped off from other stories.  The first episode is pure awesome... Debating watching it again. I just like seeing stuff borrowed and tweaked slightly. It's fun to see a long line of stuff like the hospital scene stretching through Triffids, and 28 Days Later, and this, and even Resident Evil... I don't really mind.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 08:57:08 PM
Wow... The following for this comic is crazy.

Here you go Nubbs -- Annotated Google Maps from the series:

http://comics.gearlive.com/comix411/article/q308-walking-dead-fan-utilizes-google-maps/

Since they spend most of the first 50 issues or so in GA, you can have fun.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 09:37:37 PM
All right, watching now.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 09:50:16 PM
Wow . . . Darabont directed the first episode himself. No wonder it's so good.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 10:18:14 PM
Hooooly shit. I just had to turn on the lights after Morgan's zombie wife crept up onto his porch and tried the door. 

It's scary and heart-wrenching all at the same time. I had to stop for a minute.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 10:54:26 PM
Now I could pick out all the little things (on the second viewing now).  

Having had an oxygen nose thing, it would have been almost instinctual to tear it out if the oxygen wasn't flowing.

And, in the comic's timeline, it was about a month before Rick got to Atlanta.  That tank's radio is still receiving? Judging from flowers, corpses, and general decay, it looks to be about a month in the show as well.

(That's Glenn on the radio -- who I'm looking forward to seeing.  In the comics, Glenn grabs Rick as he's running from the herd in the Atlanta streets and drags him up to the rooftops. And Glenn remains the unsung hero throughout.)

Also, I'll echo what all the people in the letters section of the comics say over and over in every issue -- Fuck you, Kirkman!

Having read 77 issues, and now watching the show, I can't help but think that Kirkman is a genius.  The comics are bad.  They're boring, poorly written, and clumsy.  Just one episode of the show is infinitely better than all of the comics together.  And, yet, just one hour of the show makes my little PA-collector heart so proud and happy that I want to kiss the man who birthed this idea.

(A month since shit fell apart, I mean.  Rick gets to Atlanta a few days after he wakes up, but that tank has been sitting there abandoned for a month.)

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 11:00:20 PM
So yeah, it's pretty amazing all right.

Two things.

1.) The zombie mythos is really well suited for television. (And comic books too for that matter.) I think nacho used the term "organic" earlier. The episodic nature of TV allows for the situation to unfold in a natural well-paced way. There's no worry about fitting everything into two hours. So much of my problem with zombie horror of late is the need to either force a full three-act story into these films (usually one I've seen a hundred times) OR the lack of story, characterization, or anything resembling narrative. A lot of the cheapies are just poorly done zombie carnage.

With TV, you get the chance to let the world evolve. In the comics, Kirkman was smart enough to understand that the audience knew up and down what happens before and during a zombie outbreak. He doesn't bore us with details we've been watching for forty years. (He found other ways to bore us.) Darabont understands the emotional pathos that Romero once captured quite astutely, but now . . . well, less so.

And what's really refreshing is the complete jettisoning of any subtext save for the emotional one. I was never having a political subtext hitting me over the head, nor was I being pulled into some post-modern tongue in cheek "knowing" thorughline. It's just story, characters . . . all the shit that zombie movies have been missing since maybe Night of the Living Dead.

2.) The make-up and effects are easily the best I've seen in any zombie movie.

SOLD!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 11:00:59 PM
Jesus... I don't know what it is.  The going into the pitch black stairwell scene gets me the second time around, too!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 11:04:27 PM
My sphincter was clinched for most of the show.

That's another thing: It's scary as hell.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 11:06:30 PM
Jesus... I don't know what it is.  The going into the pitch black stairwell scene gets me the second time around, too!

You keep waiting for something to show up and grab him every time he lights a new match.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 11:12:06 PM

1.) The zombie mythos is really well suited for television. (And comic books too for that matter.) I think nacho used the term "organic" earlier. The episodic nature of TV allows for the situation to unfold in a natural well-paced way. There's no worry about fitting everything into two hours. So much of my problem with zombie horror of late is the need to either force a full three-act story into these films (usually one I've seen a hundred times) OR the lack of story characterization or anything resembling narrative. A lot of the cheapies are just poorly done zombie carnage.

Yeah...and now that I feel confident that Kirkman's snorefest is going to be replaced by pure awesome... I'm really looking forward to how all this develops. If you trim the (tons of) fat out of the 77 issues so far, you have so much shit to work with...


Quote
And what's really refreshing is the complete jettisoning of any subtext save for the emotional one. I was never having a political subtext hitting me over the head, nor was I being pulled into some post-modern tongue in cheek "knowing" thorughline. It's just story, characters . . . all the shit that zombie movies have been missing since maybe Night of the Living Dead.

It is refreshing.  Kirkman gets somewhat preachy here and there, but not terribly so.  Rick's journey into homicidal mania takes 14 months in the comic's timeline, and is pushed there by the simple inhumanity to man.  The comics slowly evolve into the old zombie apocalypse lesson -- we are our own true enemy. But Kirkman does take that idea down a different path by making the traditional hero characters the darkly disturbed anti-heroes.

(Speaking of anti-heroes, I'm sad that we have to wait till season two for Michonne.  She's just plain awesome even in the comics.)

Quote
2.) The make-up and effects are easily the best I've seen in any zombie movie.

SOLD!

Amen.

Finally we get a PA series that could last, eh?  Six episodes this season.  Hopefully they'll add more for the second season.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 11:13:48 PM
My sphincter was clinched for most of the show.

That's another thing: It's scary as hell.

Thanks to those effects!  Jesus... The bike zombie was great. That was a big scene in the comics, but it was so poorly put together... Here you felt everything.  That rage...sadness...pity...

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 11:19:00 PM
Finally we get a PA series that could last, eh?  Six episodes this season.  Hopefully they'll add more for the second season.

Let's hope. It could have probl3ems keeping an audience due to the intensity. It's not for the weak-hearted, man. I'm a pretty hardened horror fan, and there's some stuff that's just hard to watch.

Again though, so much of that is the emotional investment. The bike zombie is a perfect example . . . Here's this horrible pathetic monstrous thing, and yet it's imbued with a humanity that makes it the more awful to watch.

I don't know, man. Who's the audience for this? (Aside from horror fans who are going to lap it up like milk from a teat.) Is the same house that watches Mad Men going to tune in for this?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 11:22:16 PM
It's AMC.  They've become masters at making their own audience. 

Breaking Bad is the best show on television right now...and it is huge.  But you sit down and watch it and not a single punch is pulled. Looking back on Breaking Bad and the journey of those characters is almost exhausting. And, yet, I'm dying for more.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 20, 2010, 11:25:55 PM
Now I wish I had TV so I could help it's ratings.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 11:27:29 PM
Now I wish I had TV so I could help it's ratings.

http://www.amcspreadthedead.com/index.php
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 11:33:08 PM
Love the promo image on the AMC site...


(http://www.greatsociety.org/uploads/userfiles/3/86715251-twd.jpg)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2010, 11:42:26 PM
Okay, so, after Jericho, and after this, I know one thing:  If the world ends and I run into Lennie James, I'm going to stick with him.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on October 23, 2010, 12:03:37 AM
we liked it a lot as well and i actually feel blessed to not have been burdened with any knowledge of the comics.  it is pretty standard procedure, though, for an "intro into this Zombie world" and my only gripe is that no one wants to call zombies zombies in their precious little projects.  even in Sean of the Dead it's "don't say the Zed word"...it doesn't subtract one iota in my mind...if they eat human flesh and can only be killed by a head shot, they're fucking zombies.  trying to make something like "walkers" sound natural never does and just becomes this big linguistic pimple.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Reginald McGraw on October 23, 2010, 12:53:29 AM
So, I figured you guys were over-hyping and there was no way I'd enjoy it as much.

I was wrong.  Gripping and intriguing.

This will be going on the DVR list!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 23, 2010, 05:24:22 AM
So, I figured you guys were over-hyping and there was no way I'd enjoy it as much.

I was wrong.  Gripping and intriguing.

This will be going on the DVR list!

The comic makes me want to eat light bulbs. I was worried that was why I liked the pilot so much... But, yeah, episode one is the only conversation I've had with anyone for three days now (one of the book launch authors tonight wrote a zombie book and I'm her handler).
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 26, 2010, 06:36:00 PM
God...I can't get the pilot out of my head! Time to watch it yet again!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 01, 2010, 08:08:43 PM
Well, strike one against anti-piracy.  Episode one -- leaked, what, a couple weeks ago? -- premiered last night to some of the highest ratings AMC has ever seen.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Reginald McGraw on November 01, 2010, 08:42:33 PM
Oh, I plan to watch the DVR'ed version again on my big(-ger) screen as well.

Although I guess I could have just hooked my laptop up to it...meh...lazy wins!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on November 02, 2010, 01:24:15 PM
Watched this on Sunday and it was awesome.  I can't wait for the rest of this show!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Tatertots on November 07, 2010, 02:53:20 PM
Finally got around to watching this. (MY LIFE IS CRAZY AHHHH)

Anyways, I opened it off to the side expecting to just casually listen in and glance at it while I worked, but I totally got sucked in. Fucking great! I mean, some of the acting and effects are really weak, but I like where they're going.

"Cozy in there?"

L O S T
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 07, 2010, 03:09:13 PM

"Cozy in there?"

L O S T

Fucking LOL.  No kidding.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 07, 2010, 03:33:59 PM
Holy shit... This banner is awesome:

http://www.greatsociety.org/uploads/userfiles/3/wd-banner.jpg
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 07, 2010, 05:19:02 PM
I mean, some of the acting and effects are really weak,

Are you serious about the FX? This show has the best zombie FX I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 08, 2010, 08:50:48 AM
I mean, some of the acting and effects are really weak,

Are you serious about the FX? This show has the best zombie FX I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot.

Surely he means the wide angle apocalypse scenes FX.  Which, yeah, are clearly CGI.

Because if he is talking about the zombie effects... We have to go and adjust Tyson!

Episode two sees a major plot change -- characters and location.  Glenn's no longer alone, and the RV team has set up a city-based scavenging outpost. Which sort of ruins Glenn's character for later on.  But he's still awesome, and the change makes a whole lot more sense than in the comics where Glenn is routinely running three miles from the camp to the city just to steal a few cans of peas.

And a clumsy writing mistake when one of the scavengers says to Rick, "You ain't Atlanta PD.  Where you from?"

Gosh, buddy, I don't know, it's not like it's right there on the sleeve of his uniform.

Overall, though, the second episode is strong.  We're still on track, and I'm still very happy with this series.  I'm also happy that we're moving at a snail's pace.  Two hours and we're only about three issues in. And only four more episodes to go... So I guess we're going to end with the prison.  Which is good because the huge problem with the comics is Rick's emergence as the leader, and the multitude of characters all inexplicably having poorly written breakdowns in the space of a few issues. If the first season is the journey to the prison, and six hours carefully exploring the characters, that'll be perfect. Then season two can be all about how badly they fuck everything up.

I'm also glad to see them stray from the comics, since the show (and the first episode) is priding itself on being loyal to the series.  That was my hesitation way back when this show was announced.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 08, 2010, 04:56:53 PM
I gotta work a huge late shift tonight, but I'll get it in me tomorrow and report back. Glad to hear its still good.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on November 10, 2010, 09:30:02 PM
um...so i didn't like any of the new characters.  And I don't really like Rick's wife and her new boyfriend.  I kind of wish this was just rick.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 10, 2010, 09:45:13 PM
um...so i didn't like any of the new characters.  And I don't really like Rick's wife and her new boyfriend.  I kind of wish this was just rick.

Well, they've added a ton of redshirts.  But the core characters are Dale (the old guy) Andrea (one of those bitchy blondes) and Glenn (the Asian kid). If they're sticking with the comics, that's all we'll have to worry about.  The rest should all die in the next episode. 

The core characters are actually pretty awesome once they get hard.  Dale is the "heart" of the group (and pays for it. Once you see Michonne in the second season, that means Dale's about to die), Andrea becomes a scarred up sharpshooter, and Glenn just runs around being Short Round.

As to Rick's fucking wife...you want to reach into EVERY SINGLE FUCKING PANEL in the comics and light her on fire. We'll be stuck with her until the climax of the second season, though, when she's lovingly blown to pieces.

Again, if we're going with the comics, then the third season will be horrifically dark and mostly just Rick. Going insane.  For twenty fucking issues.

Shane is an asshole in the comics and dead by the fourth issue.  There are drawbacks to this snail's pace approach... The really annoying characters who are supposed to be nothing more than annoying and doomed are here to torture us forever.

It's interesting...I hate the comics because you spend the first 30 or 40 issues having a really hard time keeping track of all the almost identical characters.  They're all so two-dimensional and vague in motivation that you don't care when characters like Shane get randomly picked off.

Now we get to know them well through good writing and a slow pace and we're praying for random killings of anonymously drawn and scripted characters.

I'm also very upset to hear that America's favorite blowhard redneck will survive into the next episode.  He, and the black guy, and the anonymous fat guy, are all new characters.  And pointless.  It is Rick's story and it looks like they may blur that a little bit.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 11, 2010, 10:24:49 AM
Don't forget they may pull the 'True Blood' trick of taking minor characters (Jessica) and making them major ones. Lafayette was dead at the beginning of book two of the Sookie novels.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 11, 2010, 10:45:31 AM
Maybe... They're taking so much pride in being like the comics though.



http://www.greatsociety.org/uploads/userfiles/3/wd-banner.jpg
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 16, 2010, 12:45:04 AM
Well... Episode three switched the engine speed to one quarter impulse power. 

Again, that's fine.  It's kind of weird and daring to spend what is basically an hour per each issue of the comic. But, as Cass pointed out, we don't care about the camp people.  Not really.  In the comics, they were very poorly handled and we never cared about them... So now they have to create hot button issues to make their new red shirts interesting and, in a way, it kind of makes them lose the thread.

Hey, Darabont -- Red shirts are red shirts. We don't need to get into a detailed cross-section of race in America. If anything, you want to make the red shirts sympathetic so, unlike in the comics, we actually do care when they get torn to pieces.

This weekend, Cass's girlfriend complained about an aspect that I didn't agree with -- the fact that all the same zombie rules apply, but our characters didn't know them (or had to explain them to us -- who do know the rules inside and out).  I haven't really noticed that myself...until this episode, where Georgia Redneck #2 explains that you have to destroy the brain. 

Hello!  Hello?  Yes...is this 1968 on the line?  Hello?

As to the fucking subplot to rescue Redneck #1 -- I almost threw my computer out the window.  What, did they let Kirkwood write this episode?  Because that's the sort of harebrained shit that ruined the comic.

No...fuck that.  It's even worse than the comic. Not even Kirkwood has had Rick behave as stupidly as he did in this episode.

Now, in the comics, he does go back to the city with Glenn.  He does this to raid a gun shop and, so, supplies everyone for the next year.  That's when he and Glenn cover themselves in zombie shit and all that we saw in the second episode.

We move quickly to justifying the rescue of Redneck #1 by saying it's a gun run.  Okay... But why fucking bother? It makes 100% sense that they'd go back for guns. That's why Glenn's there in the first place.  They're raiding the city.  You don't need an excuse to do so. Why bother with some pointless subplot? Why try and slow us down with complications? Survivors vs. zombies. Done. Now tell the story.

This episode's big question is:

If you have a hacksaw, do you:

(1) Use it to cut your handcuffs?

(2) Use it to cut the little piece of metal you're handcuffed to?

or

(3) Cut off your hand?


(Also -- I'm calling it now: They're going to make Redneck #1 into "The Governor," the 20-issue arc sadistic villain from the comics who makes no sense and appears out of nowhere.)

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 16, 2010, 01:05:27 AM
Yeah... Okay. I'm prepared to say it.  Episode three almost ruins the show.  But I sat through the second season of Jericho and Jeremiah, so no way will I give up yet.  But...whew.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 16, 2010, 01:09:25 AM
Well that doesn't sound good.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on November 16, 2010, 10:56:33 AM
Yeah, that was fucking stupid.  First off, the main reason I'm complaining is because what was being sold to us in the pilot and by the AMC marketing team was that this was going to be a more nuanced, serious type of horror-drama that focused more on scares and creepiness than straight up gore and soap opera baby mama drama.  So that's why I don't feel like I'm nit-picking when I ask:

Why do get about four minutes of Shane and Rick's family together, but when Rick show's back up the reunion lasts about 5 seconds?  Literally: "oh my god! it's my family!" *quick hug* cut to bonfire!  couldn't have milked a little emotion out of that?  I guess we had to cut running time to make room for the gripping "bolt cutter and radiator hose negotiation" scene later.

What's the thought process among Glenn and the others when Rick introduces himself?  "Hey, this guy's last name is Grimes and he keeps talking about his wife Lori.  We've got a Lori Grimes back at the camp.  Probably not the same one though.  That would just be insane, right?  Better not mention it to him."  

Is this old lady in camp dealing with her PTSD through product placement therapy?  I think she mentioned "my old Maytag back home" about three times.  And when they were trying to figure out what to do about Merle she suggested, "Let's call the Maytag repairman and tell him to go find him...it's not like he has anything else to do!" Maybe that's why her husband beats her.  

If they just need the gas out of the mustang, why are they also taking off the tires and pulling off random chunks of the transmission?  Rick tries to console Glenn by saying, "Maybe we can steal another one."  Great, Rick.  Let's just bring a new car back with us every time, siphon the half a tank of gas that's left, then put that one up on blocks.  Before you know it we'll have the camp surrounded by useless, rusting muscle cars.  I know we're all Georgia crackers here, but do we have to live up to the stereotype?  

Oh yeah, speaking of not living up to the stereotype...Darryl shows back up from the deer hunt and within ten seconds he makes a "On Golden Pond" reference?  Just when I think this show is going to zig, it zags!

also:

(http://cdn.videogum.com/files/2010/11/mordor.jpg)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 16, 2010, 11:39:25 AM
Whatever you're trying to attach in that post, it's freaking out my work computer...

Yeah, the Maytag thing makes me also wonder why we also get all the whinging about how the women have been reduced to cooking and cleaning.  It's the apocalypse girls! Let's start a suffragette movement!

It's like the racial stuff -- it's creating this weird hot button issue that feels completely shoehorned into the overall story.  We all know it's the end of the world, but shit still has to get done. Everyone seems to have their job. Why are we getting this enslaved women bullshit?

The redneck thing is annoying the fuck out of me.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 16, 2010, 11:50:35 AM
So what you're saying is that it only took two episodes for this show to shrivel to a turd?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 16, 2010, 12:14:56 PM
So what you're saying is that it only took two episodes for this show to shrivel to a turd?

One and a half. If you sit and think about it, there's alot that's wrong with the second episode.  You only forgive it because of the power of the first episode... You want the second episode to be just as great and, dazzled by the pilot, you can almost convince yourself that it is.

I'll finish the season... Only three more episodes, anyway.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 16, 2010, 01:26:12 PM
You know, it just hit me... Episode three reminded me of an episode of Survivor.  I think back on it today and all the scenes I can call to mind are the pointless bickering, and the negotiating for the bolt cutters, and the girls banding together and bitching, and the whining blondes, and the camp sitting around feigning anger, indignation, or slack-jawed dullness...

We need zombie Jeff Probst to call a Zombie Council.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 22, 2010, 08:58:12 AM
Well, now, I'm just pissy because episode three sucked so much... But after a slow episode discussing a woman's place after the apocalypse and the hardships of rednecks, it doesn't make me happy when we open up with two of the survivors fishing.  In a  quarry.  What are you after, gals?  Shoes?  Tires?

But that's okay because they catch a million magical quarry fish.

I do appreciate, at least, that even Rick and team are a little bit WTF about redneck #1 cutting off his hand.  Not as much as normal people as the reaction is more like, "Huh.  Well.  Guess the blade was too dull to cut through metal!"

But I think my continued pissiness is earned by this episode, as well.  We spend most of the time in Atlanta where Rick and Co. run into a very large and very difficult to maintain group.

This show is rapidly turning into the Survivors remake -- where our survivors stay in the cities of the dead with no consequences and appear to be as healthy as patrician Romans. It's months into the apocalypse, folks.  The cities are pits of disease...and, in this case, the walking dead.  The sewers stop working, the corpses of millions of people are either rotting or coming after you. It's high summer!  Atlanta is a festering cloud of sewage, cholera, and worse.

Redneck #2 is on the money -- why share weapons with a doomed group of survivors? 

But, whatever.  It's not terrible.  Everyone does think that the cause is hopeless, so it's not as bad as the new Survivors where those people would have been watching TV and eating chicken and getting fatter by the episode. At least there's the Noble Hopelessness. But, overall, it's all filler!  You only have six episodes, assholes.  Why does an entire episode need to be consumed by domestic strife and then the next episode be consumed by some pointless tangent in Atlanta?

And these are the most passive zombies ever.  Scores of people are racing around willy nilly through Atlanta, shouting, having fights... That would have been fine if episode one and two weren't totally zombielicious and scary.  Suddenly the zombies are slow loners now who pretty much ignore everything until you drive a Camero through their ranks.

Now -- all this whinging is forgiven, actually, thanks to the fact that we finally got the attack on the camp. (And the red shirts -- who we dawdled away so much time with last week -- are now just meaningless red shirts again. Making episode three even more useless!)

So do five minutes of desperate zombie shoot-em-ups make up for 40 minutes of post-apocalypse angst at the Shady Rest Zombie Home and custodians with hearts of gold?

 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 22, 2010, 09:46:10 AM
I'll catch up tomorrow and chime in.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2010, 08:37:36 AM
Episode five is so dumb and annoying I couldn't even be bothered to follow the storyline.  We spend the first half where the gang cooks up an idea to take their wounded buddy to the CDC.  It's nominally Rick's idea, but seems to be toyed with by everyone.  But, later, Shane tells Rick that he's a lunatic for having that idea, and Lori says that everyone's scared and desperate and they'll listen to anything, and then the whole focus shifts to trying to talk Rick out of the plan... Which doesn't feel like a plan anyway and Rick's still hanging around digging graves and moping.

Looks like people are mad that "Rick took half their manpower" during the zombie attack... Even though it wasn't Rick's idea to take anyone besides Glenn. Why'd we really care about redneck #1 anyway? And, anyway, he came back with guns (crying about manpower and how much danger they're in makes the last episode even worse -- oh, honey, there's a Hispanic gang down there and I gave them half our guns).

So back, yet again, to how terrible the comic is... But I very much enjoyed the standard wandering group of survivors post apocalypse.  It's a big let down to have the magic CDC guy on hand. The whole CDC idea really is stupid and crazy... Especially when they get there and it's a battlefield. Okay...turn around. Forget it.  But, no. And having someone like CDC guy there is just so close to the fatal flaw in all these modern post-apocalypse shows. This show is so sick with inter-group melodrama, why would they suddenly throw this in?

Also -- who's mowing the CDC's lawns? It's been 194 days, according to CDC guy's messages, and those lawns look great. Jethro Bodine's Post-Apocalypse Lawn & Garden Co.!



Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 29, 2010, 09:17:35 AM
With each passing episode recap, I want to watch the ones I've missed less and less.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2010, 10:27:35 AM
Only one more to suffer through! They're in the CDC HQ now... So it'll be just like the second season of the Survivors remake.

I'm wondering if they shot their wad on zombie effects... This episode has plenty of corpses, but only two zombies -- one with little effects except for milky eyes, and one medium shot of a walker.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on November 30, 2010, 09:29:10 PM
I guess this show doesn't piss me off as much as it does Nach, but I totally see all the points being made here.  I'm so in love with games like Fallout and just apocalyptic stuff in general that I guess I tend to forgive way too much when it comes to this show.  It is pretty stupid most of the time, though.  I also think a lot of the appeal for me comes from the fact that it's in Atlanta and I can recognize shit... there just isn't that much television centered around my hometown (none that I can think of, in fact) so I guess I feel obligated to watch it as much as anything.

Each episode does seem to be getting progressively more ridiculous, though.  It's like the writers have no sense of pacing whatsoever.  They take fucking forever to get to some things and then just gloss over others like they're nothing.  And some of the shit we're just expected to swallow as rational, reasonable decision making is pretty ludicrous... the guy who gets bitten and just wants to be left by the side of the road?  Are you fucking serious?  I challenge anyone to find a SINGLE person on the planet who, when faced with the same circumstances, who wouldn't take Rick's gun and immediately blow their own brains out rather than face the prospect of becoming a zombie.  But nooo, I'd rather just sit here by the side of the road and become a fucking zombie, wandering around the woods and bumping into trees for eternity.

And yeah, I don't care about any of the characters.  I dunno... the whole thing feels rushed and painfully slow all at once.  Stupid bitch with her goddamn dead sister took up half the fucking episode with her blubbering... to the point I was hoping she'd just get bitten and get it over with. 

There's just so much potential!  I guess I keep watching (and looking forward to each new episode, even) just out of spite or something.

The CDC shit is a bit ridiculous, as well.  I find it hard to believe that a place that secure would survive the zombie apocalypse with only a single person inside.  If anything, there'd be at least a dozen or so, I would think.  It's like the radiator hose on the RV... it feels as if it was written into the script in episode two so that in episode five, it would break on their trip to the CDC, forcing them to stop and giving them the opportunity to ditch the sick man by the side of the road.  I can already tell they're writing the "lone CDC survivor" into the script to facilitate some other idea they've had for a future episode on down the line.  Lazy, shoddy writing... if they're going to do it, they should at least make it a little less obvious or more streamlined... something.

It's certainly not the worst television I've ever sat through, despite all the griping I'm doing.  The blood and gore are pretty incredible... bitch going to town on her husband's head with that pick axe had me squirming in my seat.  The walkers have been pretty great in most of the episodes and there have been more than a few moments where I've felt myself getting wound up or antsy about what's happening on screen, which is the reason we watch stuff like this to begin with, right? 

Oh well... I kinda hope it gets picked up for another season if only so I can see where they're planning on going with it.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 30, 2010, 09:48:15 PM
Oh, yes, the ratings are through the roof.  It got picked up for season two before it aired, in fact.  The "leaks" decided that.

In the comics, though, we're only up to, like, issue four.  But now Darabont and Kirkman are saying it'll be nothing like the comics. Which would be just fine if it wasn;t so poorly put together.  The fuckers.

I'm with you, though.  I'm watching, and plan to watch them again back to back. I love the apocalypse.  I'll watch anything with that setting.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on November 30, 2010, 10:20:50 PM
Yep... and I mean, all the nit picking aside, it's been pretty cool, unique television in a lot of respects.  The special effects have blown me away and I really feel like this could be one of those shows that, 3 or 4 years from now, people go, "Yeah man!  Walking Dead!  Skip the first season, but once it hits season 3, it really hits its stride!"
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on November 30, 2010, 10:21:49 PM
I still think Zombieland would have made a way better television show, though.  Holy shit... just thinking about that kinda gives me a chubby.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 30, 2010, 10:31:59 PM
I still think Zombieland would have made a way better television show, though.  Holy shit... just thinking about that kinda gives me a chubby.

Easily the best zombie story put to film, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on December 01, 2010, 09:52:08 AM
Seems like Darabont feels the same way Nacho does.

Quote
Frank Darabont Axes All Writers from THE WALKING DEAD

With such a successful short-but-sweet first season that has already garnered increased ratings and a successful series order, what could be wrong with the writing staff of AMC’s new hit series The Walking Dead? Well, nothing may be wrong per se, but there is something going on behind the scenes as Deadline  reports series writer/executive producer/director Frank Darabont has gotten rid of all the writers from this first season. The industry blog points out that while writing staffs do have line-up changes from season-to-season, a complete overhaul isn’t customary. Apparently Darabont is looking to work through the second season without a writing staff and merely assign scripts to freelance writers.

While this might seem a bit out of the ordinary, Darabont does come from feature films (although he was also behind some of The Young Indiana Jones), so maybe he’s just shaking things up a bit (after all he was involved with writing nearly all of the episodes from the first season). It’s also mentioned that the freelance method of writing has been mostly successfully employed for Torchwood from Starz and BBC (a method borrowed from the UK where the show was originally spawned). However, this new method may bring some heat from the Writers Guild and could even prove difficult with 13 episodes lined up for the second season. Apparently the decision to use freelance writers isn’t final, and the series may end up utilizing both a writing staff and freelancers from time to time. I just hope this doesn’t screw up what has been one of the best new series on television. A writing staff can help create unity in the story and usually is extremely well-versed in the show’s mythology, which, in the case of a comic adaptation like this, would be very helpful. I’m not saying this is a bad idea, but it does seem to prove rather worrisome.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 01, 2010, 10:51:37 AM
Ha!

Quote
I just hope this doesn’t screw up what has been one of the best new series on television. A writing staff can help create unity in the story and usually is extremely well-versed in the show’s mythology, which, in the case of a comic adaptation like this, would be very helpful. I’m not saying this is a bad idea, but it does seem to prove rather worrisome.

Seriously -- 20 minutes of episode five is spent with Andrea sitting next to her sister crying and everyone staring at her.  You don't need a writing staff to print out 20 blank pages.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 01, 2010, 10:01:33 PM
A-fucking-men. 

I was thinking about it and, honestly... the character I like best is the racist, unsympathetic hick who ran around in episode 5 pickaxing everything in sight.  At least he's got some depth to him.  You actually start to kind of like him when they're making their way back to camp in episode 4.  He's found out his brother was left behind, chained to a pipe in a city full of zombies and has gone back only to find that his severed hand, yet he's able to get past all of that and work with the very guys who shackled his brother to try and get back to camp.  Sure, he's racist and you kind of start to re-hate him a little bit for being so callous, but he's easily the most realistic character of the bunch... and that says something about how shoddy the writing is. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 02, 2010, 02:15:55 AM
A-fucking-men. 

I was thinking about it and, honestly... the character I like best is the racist, unsympathetic hick who ran around in episode 5 pickaxing everything in sight.  At least he's got some depth to him.  You actually start to kind of like him when they're making their way back to camp in episode 4.  He's found out his brother was left behind, chained to a pipe in a city full of zombies and has gone back only to find that his severed hand, yet he's able to get past all of that and work with the very guys who shackled his brother to try and get back to camp.  Sure, he's racist and you kind of start to re-hate him a little bit for being so callous, but he's easily the most realistic character of the bunch... and that says something about how shoddy the writing is. 

You like him because he's one of the Saints!  That's why I (and everyone else) likes him.

Which, sadly, destroys Rick (our supposed hero).
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 02, 2010, 09:44:00 PM
Ya know... I never thought Boondock was all that great, but maybe I just didn't watch it with the right eyes.  I've only seen it once and it just seemed kind of cheesy to me.  I probably need to give it another shot.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on December 03, 2010, 12:30:24 AM
so I stopped watchin the show but kept reading the videogum recaps.  Because life is all about picking something apart the moment it airs.  but this struck me as particularly funny since it's the lead paragraph.

Quote
The two blonde sisters are out on a boat in the middle of the quarry, fishing. Are there fish in quarries? Aren’t quarries usually just murky lifeless holes in the ground? We will never know, of course, because there is no Wikipedia in the Zombie Apocalypse. The girls start talking about fishing knots in a very intense way. Relax, ladies. Apparently, their dad taught them different types of fishing knots because of how THEY ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE. Oh boy, here come the waterworks. Ladies, I’m not trying to interrupt what is clearly a breakthrough bonding session that the two of you are having on a boat in the middle of the quarry, but you do realize that you are in the middle of a Zombie Apocalypse, right? I’m just saying that it is time to buck up. If it hurts too much to talk about fishing knots, then do not talk about fishing knots. Lord knows, you would save the rest of us a lot of boredom. “Are they still talking about fishing knots?” “Yeah, they’re crying now, but the conversation is still pretty much about the knots.” “OK, wake me up when they’re done talking about fishing knots.” “Might be awhile.” “That’s fine, I could use the shut-eye.”

Meanwhile, dude’s up on a hill digging holes in the ground. UH OH!

Easy enough. They tie him up to a tree. Do you guys remember that time on Lost when Sayid tied Sawyer to a tree and threatened to rip his fingernails off? Man, remember Lost? Kind of wish we were watching Lost right now. Eventually, the dude explains that he was digging the holes because of sunstroke and because of something that he dreamed that he cannot remember. OK, weirdo. They leave him tied to the tree for a really long time, because that’s what weirdos get.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on December 03, 2010, 12:50:56 AM
Quote
(Incidentally, remember how one of the explanations Grimes gave to his wife for why he needed to abandon her and their child on a suicide mission into Atlanta was that he was going to try and raise that father and son from the first episode on the radio because he promised them he would find them and save them? Cool thing he never did any of that. Hope those guys are just wandering around Atlanta all alone being like ‘Grimes? Come in, Grimes!’) Oh, no big deal about the truck, I guess. Turns out, it is totally possible to just run all the way back to camp
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 03, 2010, 07:49:30 AM
Yeah... It really is a terrible show.  Last one this weekend, thank god.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on December 03, 2010, 03:54:54 PM
Quote
Robert Kirkman Addresses Walking Dead Reports

Robert Kirkman, executive producer of The Walking Dead television series and writer of the comic book on which it's based, has now added the job of firefighter to his resume by performing damage control concerning the news that Frank Darabont has sacked the entire writing staff of the show.

Kirkman recently spoke to TVGuide.com about the shakeup on the hit AMC zombie series. "It's kind of unfortunate that it's being reported that our writing staff has been fired, because that's not the case," Kirkman said. "It makes Frank look bad. I don't think Frank wants it out there that he's just firing people off of a successful show seemingly for no reason."

It seems Kirkman has managed to keep his gig, though, saying he's excited to continue working with Darabont. Regarding the report that among the fired was Charles "Chic" Eglee, Darabont's right-hand man on the series, Kirkman said, "Chic Eglee is a high-level television writer. He was brought onto The Walking Dead with the idea that Frank was going to work on the first season and then go off and do movies . . . Chic didn't want to be second-in-command on a show when he's used to being a top dog, and so he decided to go off and do something else, which is something that happens and is not a big deal."

As for how next season's writing will be handled, Kirkman said, "It's a little premature to be nailing down. I don't know if it's going to be a freelance situation or if we're going to have writers in a writers' room . . . That's something that's being worked on now."

While it's sweet of Kirkman to step up and try to put out this fire, all he's really doing is confirming the belief that Darabont is a micromanaging one-man band — not that there's anything wrong with that. Methinks Mr. Kirkman should keep his day job...if he can.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 03, 2010, 04:11:48 PM
I think, no matter what, the show will die during the next season.  It's only all the rage now because it's (sorta kinda) breaking new ground. Big budget, properly backed PA drama.

Up till now, TV's been afraid to properly lurch into PA and stick with it. Look at Jericho!  The fans bend over backwards to get it renewed and the first thing the second season does is say, well, it wasn't really an apocalypse. We stopped most of the bombs and there's a government and the world has survived.  Jeremiah did the same. Second season opens up and suddenly there's a highly developed eastern army in the picture, and Samwise is sent by God, and there's a little outfit of surviving adults spreading their knowledge...

Meanwhile, the new Survivors has a team of scientists working on a cure, a quarantined area where the government lives on, and is more like the police just closed the street for the weekend than the end of the world.

The people like me who really hunger for a true apocalypse series put all their eggs in the Walking Dead basket.  It's why I'll finish this season, and give it a second chance, even though most of the airtime is spent with a single camera on the wall watching the paint dry.  But the good graces of hopeful PA-fanatics will not survive another 12 episodes of that.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on December 04, 2010, 04:21:39 AM
I still think Zombieland would have made a way better television show, though.  Holy shit... just thinking about that kinda gives me a chubby.

Easily the best zombie story put to film, in my opinion.

TV writers would only fuck it up.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 04, 2010, 10:35:06 AM
so I stopped watchin the show but kept reading the videogum recaps.  Because life is all about picking something apart the moment it airs.  but this struck me as particularly funny since it's the lead paragraph.

Quote
The two blonde sisters are out on a boat in the middle of the quarry, fishing. Are there fish in quarries? Aren’t quarries usually just murky lifeless holes in the ground? We will never know, of course, because there is no Wikipedia in the Zombie Apocalypse. The girls start talking about fishing knots in a very intense way. Relax, ladies. Apparently, their dad taught them different types of fishing knots because of how THEY ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE. Oh boy, here come the waterworks. Ladies, I’m not trying to interrupt what is clearly a breakthrough bonding session that the two of you are having on a boat in the middle of the quarry, but you do realize that you are in the middle of a Zombie Apocalypse, right? I’m just saying that it is time to buck up. If it hurts too much to talk about fishing knots, then do not talk about fishing knots. Lord knows, you would save the rest of us a lot of boredom. “Are they still talking about fishing knots?” “Yeah, they’re crying now, but the conversation is still pretty much about the knots.” “OK, wake me up when they’re done talking about fishing knots.” “Might be awhile.” “That’s fine, I could use the shut-eye.”

Meanwhile, dude’s up on a hill digging holes in the ground. UH OH!

Easy enough. They tie him up to a tree. Do you guys remember that time on Lost when Sayid tied Sawyer to a tree and threatened to rip his fingernails off? Man, remember Lost? Kind of wish we were watching Lost right now. Eventually, the dude explains that he was digging the holes because of sunstroke and because of something that he dreamed that he cannot remember. OK, weirdo. They leave him tied to the tree for a really long time, because that’s what weirdos get.

Ok, this is hilarious. :)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on December 06, 2010, 09:04:43 AM
Only in 2010 can an awesome first episode of a hopefully awesome series turn to shit the moment the tv executives demand "emotional identification" with the characters.

Thankfully it's only 6 episodes.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 09:15:39 AM
Okay... After a nice little pre-titles teaser, the first 20 minutes are spent with everyone being drunk and moody in the CDC bunker.  Then, when they finally go OMG! WTF! to Doctor Exposition, he takes them to the lab and shows them footage of how the disease kills, then reanimates.  No one goes, hey, doc, stop the brain anatomy lesson and tell us WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED AND WHY AND HOW!!!!! *ka-blam* for a four minute scene (which ends with the "MRI camera" image of a reanimating zombie being shot through the head, and we clearly see the gun, and redneck wife asks "what was that?"  Um... Losing your vision? Or did you just fall asleep during the wasteful effects sequence?

Nobody asks right out how it started, or where, or when, or what the state of the world is.  We sort of get around to those questions.  Like, "Is this happening everywhere?"  To which Dr Exposition keeps silent and wanders away moodily.  There's no information shared at all, except for the lesson in brain anatomy.

Then we're told that the facility -- which, mind you, is meant to be an apocalypse bunker for the entire CDC -- only has an hour of power left before it blows up.  LOL.

Doctor Exposition wanders away again and Rick and company head to the power room (I guess the magic computer told them the location?) to fix it... Because all small town Kentucky sheriff deputies are well versed in keeping the CDC alive and functioning.

As everything shuts down, Dr Exposition does finally tell them that France was the last to go, and that there may be a solution. But no time for talk now! The other half of the show is everyone trying to get out of the control room and generally freaking out.  Dr. Exposition does whisper something to Rick right before he lets them go (we have no idea what he says, but Rick's reaction looks to be shock), then there's a tedious scene where some folks decide to commit suicide and others try to talk them out of it with four minutes on the clock. We spend that four minutes:

Crying about who stays and trying to convince them not to

Running up about 20 flights of stairs

Racing through the entire CDC building

Futilely trying to break a window and finally letting off a grenade (which is a two minute scene in itself)

Running across the main lawn, fighting a handful of zombies, and piling into the cars and tyhe RV (which is now in working order, so I guess the zombies are pretty good with auto repair).


So...what's the point of the France thing?  The cure is in... Paris! So, when civilization recovers in two or three generations -- if it does -- you'll be able to get there and check it out!

We end with a ridiculous explosion that destroys the CDC building and sends out a massive shockwave but doesn't touch any of our caravan that's parked right there in the blast zone (and Dale and Andrea who just crouched behind some sandbags don't seem the worse for wear either). Then we drive off! End season one.

I'll give this episode an extra star because it actually had three good minutes!  The opening flashback, and some zombie kills on the CDC's lawn.  

Now...the other 41 minutes?  I'll just ignore those!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on December 06, 2010, 09:34:16 AM
So your final analysis is that the show is terrible?

A lot of people seem to like it a lot, so I'm torn.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 10:50:59 AM
It is terrible!  People like it because it's really pretty.  I'm still tempted to marathon it again just for PA Atlanta and pastoral drives...but it's really a waste.

Seriously, nothing was answered at the CDC. Though reading the fan site that recaps each show -- and they're serious apologists for the show -- pointed out even worse potential developments.  That Rick is a kinder, gentler zombie. Which explains why Shane thinks he's dead in the flashback, why the doctor is a little freaked, and the stupid whispered comment in the finale.

I sure hope that's not the scenario. (It's hinted in the comics that we're all carriers.)

So let's let the apologists describe the finale (they echoed the same problems I outlined):

Quote
And we get the zombie plague explanation at the eleventh hour, which most zombie stories deliver in the first act. Did it work for you? The several-minute lecture seemed weirdly placed in the finale and overlong because it didn't reveal anything we hadn't already assumed. (That there's a mysterious zombie thing that's "microbial, viral, parasitic, fungal" or the "wrath of god"?) And why was it that brain-scan on the Star Trek flight deck looked so IMAX and futuristic?

Quote
Oh, then Jenner—sympathetic, loving husband, kind to children—decides he's going to mercy-kill everyone, little kids included, because he's stubbornly convinced that a quick, premature cremation is best for everyone. And a Big Honking Digital Clock (Jack Bauer must be so jealous) counts down the seconds. Why did the finale for an original show about a zombie apocalypse have to end with literally the most overused cliché in tv history? Why is there a count-down clock in the finale, and why is the final shot a piece of horribly chintzy cheap CGI of a building blowing up? A lack of imagination. They wanted to go out with a bang—so they made it go bang! Why does the plot twist require so much exposition? The show has to explain away its own laziness.

For some reason, Darabont and company have always felt that a zombie apocalypse is not enough, so they lard on extra action-movie cliches to raise the stakes sky-high. The thirty-minutes-til-the-place-blows device was arbitrary. But the ticking, red, 1980's digital clock (in a lab of 31st century neuron modeling) was utterly MacGruber. Why would this sophisticated system not have a failsafe or override? Why would Jenner tell everyone to conserve electricity if he wanted everyone to die anyway? This is zombie logic. It works in a schlocky zombie movie, but not in a television drama with so much somber seriousness. It's made worse by the terrible pacing of the revelation that subject TS-19 was Jenner's wife — the audience understands this so long before Rick that the final minutes fizzle.

Quote
Viewers were promised something uncompromisingly grim and random like the graphic novels—in which central characters die suddenly and with no warning—but essentially all of the main characters have been survived on this show. The few who did die (poor birthday girl Amy), we barely knew. Moreover, to be perfectly crass, why couldn't the ever-more-irritating Dale just sacrifice himself for the greater good? (And why does Dale make the full-court press on blonde Andrea, but everyone's just like: Oh, let the black chick die if she wants, there's no time to argue?)

Quote
You also get to see Rick leaping away from a fireball after the grenade blast, in the cheeziest of cheese, before the second giant fireball somehow doesn't decimate their truck.

Quote
In six episodes, The Walking Dead  hasn't so much had an arc as it's been videogame-style episodic: Travel from point A to point B, while avoiding zombies and lots of poor dialogue about how bad it all is. If you like this show, by the way, you will love the videogame Left 4 Dead 2.) Even though the series has had about seven hours to unfurl, since episode two this show hasn't so much wrapped up any single arc as it has barely introduced characters and scattered options for next season: Morgan and his son, Merle and Darryl, Shane and Rick, Rick and Lori, and, now, Dale and Andrea. We started in the country, then spent a bit of time in Atlanta, then made it to camp, then on the road, then a single day in the CDC. Nothing made much of an impact. The show's been consumed with a lot of plot machinery that has been contrived to create action suspense but it hasn't really moved the story itself anywhere in particular.

This show is enormously popular. Sometimes shows and films are enormously popular because they're excellent and innovative. And sometimes they're popular just because there's a terrific premise and source material that even a basic level of competence is enough. This show seems to be operating on the latter principle, so far, but there have been flashes of promise (such as the fifth episode). Here's hoping that next season, with a surely bigger budget and hopefully better writers, AMC delivers the kind of show the network is capable of producing.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on December 06, 2010, 06:13:04 PM
Thank fuck I live in Paris!

I was really hoping we'd get rid of that stupid, cunting blonde bitch, and a couple of other annoying characters with that whole "we wanna stay behind and get vapourised."

RC, a quick rundown: A television show with great promise, an awesome first episode, a fairly good second episode which then degenerated because the writers decided to spunk their load over characterization, stupid sub-plots, and trying to get the audience involved with the characters' "EMOTIONS" and bla bla bla. These writers insisted on spunking this rancid load into episodes 3, 4, and 5.

In Episode 6 they had a chance to redeem themselves with a great finale: maybe a few cast characters getting killed off, actually fucking learning something about the world situation from a supposed scientist who was apparently a grumpy, depressed janitor who'd found a lab-technicians coat. Instead, the audience learns nothing about the world situation, we're subjected to a dreamy euthanasia speech about how when the brain dies, "the YOU dies," etc. etc. and then there is some rushed action sequences with the characters looking panicked, and.... And....

Fucking nothing.

The writers were too busy spunking their rancid cum-shots of character development all over the audiences families to actually pay any attention to a real plot or development of any kind.

Paris is the only safe place because Monkey lives there. He's the new Sheriff in town.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 06:19:12 PM
Haha... I agree! In fact, everyone had better go download episode six while they can.  When I get home in a couple of hours I'm nuking the whole show (except for the first episode -- I'm going to pretend it's an unaired pilot that wasn't picked up).
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on December 06, 2010, 06:19:39 PM
I like Nacho's idea.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 06:24:03 PM
Oh, and, the more I think about the grenade and then the big CDC explosion, the madder I get.  I don't care about the bad effects, it was just so poorly done...and pointless.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on December 06, 2010, 06:43:07 PM
It didn't happen, Nacho. T'was but a fever dream; Walking Dead was naught but a trailer that no network would pick up.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 10:51:01 PM
"If you shower, go easy on the hot water."

*cut to everyone drinking, fucking, crying, and thinking in the shower*
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 10:58:03 PM
"If you shower, go easy on the hot water."

*cut to everyone drinking, fucking, crying, and thinking in the shower*

Hahaha!  Oh, god.  Deleting this fucking show from my harddrive is almost therapeutic.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:12:30 PM
Jesus, the most unbelievable part of this show is that these people, every single one of them, are too fucking stupid to have survived this long.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 11:15:25 PM
Jesus, the most unbelievable part of this show is that these people, every single one of them, are too fucking stupid to have survived this long.

Haha!  Oh no!  This thread is a LOL everytime someone posts.

Hey, RC -- here:

http://www.netflix.com/Movie/Jeremiah-Season-1/60033709

Jeremiah. Season one.  Watch instantly.  It's really fucking rocky for, like, the entire series (two seasons), but it delivers where Walking Dead didn't.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:21:19 PM
hahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa this show is so fucking awful... just when you think it can't get worse, the doc loses all hope, puts on a lab coat and locks everyone inside the CDC batcave.

THA AIR.  IT SETS THA AIR ON FIURE. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:22:24 PM
"That door was made to withstand a hit from a rocket launcher"

*hick spends remainder of episode hitting door with an axe*
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on December 06, 2010, 11:23:48 PM
ah, well.  so we all got sold.  Let's just stop talking about it forever.  As long as AMC took in enough money to fund another 4 seasons of breaking bad and 2 more of the much more entropic mad men, I'll be happy.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:25:27 PM
I like how there's no fuel left to run the generators, but there's enough fuel left to incinerate the entire CDC... nice planning, CDC guys.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 11:26:43 PM
"That door was made to withstand a hit from a rocket launcher"

*hick spends remainder of episode hitting door with an axe*

Okay, I'm opening the door.  But, like, you're going to need a grenade to get out of here.  Also, we're a mile underground and you have four minutes to get to the surface and there's no power.  Also, I'm keeping the black girl. We're gonna die together. WAIT! SHUT UP!  I've got to make this broadcast to...uh... *whispers*
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:30:19 PM
You mean now we gotta go to Fra-unce, Paw?!

CEST LA VIE OR SOMETHIN!

WAAAh waaaaaaaah

*cue Dylan song*
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on December 06, 2010, 11:30:36 PM
Quote
Easy on the wine, guys. The old guy explains that in Europe, children are allowed to have a little bit of wine at dinner. Grimes is like, why not, let’s let Carl have a little bit of wine. Really, The Walking Dead? I mean, on the one hand, I’m all for easing America’s puritanical relationship towards, well, everything, and am fully in favor of being open and honest with children about the adult world up to and including letting them have a little bit of wine at dinner so that alcohol is demystified for them because the roots of alcoholism are biological and not particularly dependent on age–like, an alcoholic will find alcohol eventually, that’s not the issue here–and this (potentially) prevents teenagers from dangerously over-indulging out of some kind of adolescent enthusiasm for gaining access to the forbidden, but how long are we going to spend on this whole “Carl having a sip of wine” scene? I also like that the argument for why Carl should be allowed to try wine is “Europe” rather than “because the fucking world has ended.”
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 11:31:21 PM
ah, well.  so we all got sold.  Let's just stop talking about it forever.  As long as AMC took in enough money to fund another 4 seasons of breaking bad and 2 more of the much more entropic mad men, I'll be happy.

Yeah.  Fuck Walking Dead.  I'm pissed.

I like how there's no fuel left to run the generators, but there's enough fuel left to incinerate the entire CDC... nice planning, CDC guys.

PS, viewers -- there's a reactor beneath the CDC (just like there is here at NIH and the Naval Hospital and the Pentagon).  The HQ in Atlanta is meant to support a few hundred people working 24/7.  As well as six people taking a shower together for an hour.

I love how the CDC's generator room is an ad hoc sort of place with barrels of oil.  Cut to Dr. Exposition soapboxing about fossil fuels.  

Huh?  Well, Dr. Exposition, with the extinction of the human race...there are now enough fossil fuels to power the place for a million years!

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 11:32:30 PM

Quote
Easy on the wine, guys. The old guy explains that in Europe, children are allowed to have a little bit of wine at dinner. Grimes is like, why not, let’s let Carl have a little bit of wine. Really, The Walking Dead? I mean, on the one hand, I’m all for easing America’s puritanical relationship towards, well, everything, and am fully in favor of being open and honest with children about the adult world up to and including letting them have a little bit of wine at dinner so that alcohol is demystified for them because the roots of alcoholism are biological and not particularly dependent on age–like, an alcoholic will find alcohol eventually, that’s not the issue here–and this (potentially) prevents teenagers from dangerously over-indulging out of some kind of adolescent enthusiasm for gaining access to the forbidden, but how long are we going to spend on this whole “Carl having a sip of wine” scene? I also like that the argument for why Carl should be allowed to try wine is “Europe” rather than “because the fucking world has ended.”

Haha!  Okay, RC, I hope you downloaded 5 and 6 because I am fucking erasing this shit from my harddrive...and my brain.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:32:38 PM
Quote
I also like that the argument for why Carl should be allowed to try wine is “Europe” rather than “because the fucking world has ended.”

HAHAHAHA!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:33:52 PM
PS, viewers -- there's a reactor beneath the CDC (just like there is here at NIH and the Naval Hospital and the Pentagon).  The HQ in Atlanta is meant to support a few hundred people working 24/7.  As well as six people taking a shower together for an hour.

I love how the CDC's generator room is an ad hoc sort of place with barrels of oil.  Cut to Dr. Exposition soapboxing about fossil fuels. 

Huh?  Well, Dr. Exposition, with the extinction of the human race...there are now enough fossil fuels to power the place for a million years!

Seriously, we make nuclear subs that can run under their own power for a hundred years, but the most advanced disease control center on earth is powered by 4 Sears generators.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 11:34:12 PM
To be honest, I'm still trying to figure out how and why the zombies fixed the radiator on the RV.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Nubbins on December 06, 2010, 11:36:03 PM
Thank fuck I live in Paris!

Why?  You know season 2 is just going to be them running around in berets, riding Vespas with shotguns strapped to their backs and teaching the kids to hold their cigarettes between their index finger and thumb.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 11:37:58 PM
Thank fuck I live in Paris!

Why?  You know season 2 is just going to be them running around in berets, riding Vespas with shotguns strapped to their backs and teaching the kids to hold their cigarettes between their index finger and thumb.

Oh no.  Darabont has gone on and on about Michonne. Season two is all about katanas and love triangles and...and...removing my eyeballs with a spoon.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2010, 11:41:56 PM
Jesus, the most unbelievable part of this show is that these people, every single one of them, are too fucking stupid to have survived this long.

Haha!  Oh no!  This thread is a LOL everytime someone posts.

Hey, RC -- here:

http://www.netflix.com/Movie/Jeremiah-Season-1/60033709

Jeremiah. Season one.  Watch instantly.  It's really fucking rocky for, like, the entire series (two seasons), but it delivers where Walking Dead didn't.

Quoting from the last page because I'm watching it again now and I'm like, LOL, no HD? Really? Is this 1979 or something?

Also, I'd forgotten that every second tier actor from BSG and Stargate is in it.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on December 06, 2010, 11:42:25 PM
and nervous ad buyers....
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on December 07, 2010, 09:14:33 AM
Thank fuck I live in Paris!

Why?  You know season 2 is just going to be them running around in berets, riding Vespas with shotguns strapped to their backs and teaching the kids to hold their cigarettes between their index finger and thumb.

Oh no.  Darabont has gone on and on about Michonne. Season two is all about katanas and love triangles and...and...removing my eyeballs with a spoon.

If they come to Paris I'm so gonna try for an acting spot.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 09, 2010, 01:11:41 PM
Now Eglee's out:

Quote
Ultra violent superheroes (or villains) beware. If your "Powers" are being abused, they'll be coming to shut you down. Writer Brian Michael Bendis confirmed today that "The Walking Dead" executive producer Charles Chic Eglee (also known for "Dexter" and "The Shield") is in talks to head up the television adaptation of the long-running comic series "Powers," discovered Spinoff. OK, I rarely do this, Bendis wrote yesterday afternoon on Twitter, but the Powers TV rumor that hit the net today confirmed as fact!  Created by Bendis and Michael Avon Oeming, "Powers" follows the lives of Christian Walker and Deena Pilgrim, homicide detectives who investigate cases involving powers (people with superhuman abilities) in a world where superheroes and supervillains are common. The comic is over-the-top violent and ultra bloody.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on December 10, 2010, 11:33:50 AM
Wow....that will be even worse!  At least zombies look good on TV.  No one in a cape and tights ever does.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 22, 2010, 01:45:08 PM
Snore...

http://blastr.com/2010/12/promo-video-for-the-walki.php

Season one recap and the showrunners hinting about season two.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 07, 2011, 04:41:14 PM
More season two hints posted today at Sci Fi Wire... But nothing really juicy except that they'll be wandering the wasteland for the entire season. Just what we need! It'll be like The Road and EVERY OTHER ZOMBIE MOVIE EVER except with unlikable characters.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Cassander on March 07, 2011, 09:21:28 PM
hope we get some more awesome maytag reminisces. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 11, 2011, 04:24:40 PM
Nice.

Quote
Every Walking Dead plot condensed into 8 easy comic-book steps

http://blastr.com/walking_dead_the_gutters.jpg
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 18, 2011, 06:20:20 PM
Heaven hates ham.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on July 18, 2011, 06:24:24 PM
I'm sad that I couldn't get into this show.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 18, 2011, 06:30:18 PM
I'm sad it was so bad that I couldn't get into it.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Reginald McGraw on July 18, 2011, 10:25:48 PM
I'm glad I only ever watched the first episode.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on July 20, 2011, 10:57:37 AM
Maybe if they fired all the writers from the first season and replaced them for this second season, it might be good.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 20, 2011, 12:06:54 PM
They did do that!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on July 25, 2011, 12:40:19 PM
Fingers crossed!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 27, 2011, 04:04:55 PM
Wow... Frank Darabont just quit the show.

He's the showrunner! This whole thing is such a circus.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on July 27, 2011, 11:19:00 PM
Oh no....
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 28, 2011, 08:49:33 AM
Quote
Glen Mazzara is taking over as showrunner for The Walking Dead, sources close to the show confirm, though it's not clear yet what exactly Frank Darabont's role in the series' production will be moving forward. Mazzara wrote season one's penultimate episode "Wildfire" and was brought on as second in command back in February; before that, he was an executive producer on Hawthorne (eh), the TV adaptation of Crash (yeesh), and The Shied (amazing). So just to recap: First, The Walking Dead became the most successful show in AMC's history, then executive producer Frank Darabont basically fired all the writers, then he decided to hire Mazzara, and then he decided to bow out as showrunner. For a show that's only aired six episodes, that's a lot of musical chairs.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on August 11, 2011, 11:54:36 AM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walking-dead-what-happened-fired-221449 (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walking-dead-what-happened-fired-221449)

Quote
'The Walking Dead': What Really Happened to Fired Showrunner Frank Darabont

The cast is "scared," the crew is crushed after Darabont is canned while working to fix an episode that a director turned in with unusable footage.

When Frank Darabont appeared on a Comic-Con panel July 22 to promote The Walking Dead, he didn't realize he was a dead man walking. Neither did the cast and crew. Everyone was shocked when news broke three days later that AMC had taken the extraordinary step of firing Darabont from the network's biggest ratings hit.

In hot, sticky Atlanta, where production on the second season had been under way since June, the cast was summoned to a lunch meeting with AMC vp scripted programming Ben Davis, who confirmed that Darabont was out. The crew was briefed separately. One insider says those gathered were stunned at "the duplicity of AMC" for having used Darabont to promote the show at Comic-Con before firing him. And they were angry about the lack of explanation; they were simply told, cryptically, "This isn't working." Above all, they were disheartened. "It's a crushing blow," says the insider. "Even when you have a hit, they can still destroy you."

Darabont -- like many showrunners, not known for a small ego or manageable temperament -- had been working on an edit in Los Angeles. After he was sent packing, he returned to give some final notes. He sent farewell e-mails to  associates on the show. But he has maintained a steady silence in the media as his representatives work out the terms of his departure. Through his lawyer, Darabont said he has no interest in talking to the press.

There also have been no public comments from the cast, and a source with knowledge of the situation says AMC has been "terrorizing" them and their representatives to discourage them from speaking out on Darabont's behalf. "They're scared," confirms another insider. "They're on a zombie show. They are all really easy to kill off."

AMC issued a statement after Darabont was dismissed, expressing gratitude for his "innumerable" contributions to the show. Asked to comment on criticism for the handling of his departure, a spokesperson said, "We have nothing further to add."

This drama makes it a hat trick: Within a space of months, AMC has become embroiled in messy public fights with the creators of its top three shows -- Mad Men, Breaking Bad and now Walking Dead. The battles have been about money, but in this case, at least, it was more of a slow burn than a sudden flare-up. Sources say last fall, even before the first episode of the show had aired, AMC let it be known that it would effectively slash the show's second-season budget per episode by about $650,000, from $3.4 million to $2.75 million. AMC cut the budget and pocketed a tax credit previusly applied to the show. An AMC source says the size of the cut cited by sources is "grossly inflated" and that the second-season budget represents a more typical and sustainable number for a basic cable show.

At a glance, it would appear AMC is taking a big risk with its only huge commercial success. Mad Men and Breaking Bad are Emmy magnets that average 2.3 million and 4.3 million viewers, respectively. But Walking Dead, based on a series of graphic novels, attracted an astonishing 5.3 million viewers when it premiered on Halloween. The season finale in December drew more than 6 million viewers. In the 18-to-49 demo, it chalked up the biggest number ever for any drama on basic cable.

AMC has enjoyed stunning success since it stopped relying on old movies and plunged into original series with Mad Men in 2007. But given its recent battles, several sources involved with its signature shows say AMC does not seem ready to handle its success. "It feels like they don't have the experience of being on top," one fumes. "They're total ball-busters, and that pisses people off."

But being on top can be more about perception than profit. It's no coincidence that these flare-ups have come at a time when success for the network will be defined in far more specific terms. In July, AMC was spun off from parent Cablevision as AMC Networks (which also includes Sundance Channel, IFC and others). AMC has been preparing to face Wall Street's scrutiny as its expenditures on programming have shot up. (According to SNL Kagan, the network's programming budget has climbed from $123.3 million in 2006, the year before it got into original series, to an estimated $174.5 million this year --actually not that much given the network's 180.)

What is also hugely significant is that Walking Dead is the only show AMC owns, which means the network bears all the financial risk (and could reap much greater rewards in success). That is not the kind of chance that the network had been willing to take before. AMC developed Mad Men and even fully financed a pilot before the company decided that the cost of the first season, about $25 million, was too much to bear. So AMC sold the idea to Lionsgate and licensed it from the studio. Lionsgate owns Mad Men, and Sony Television owns Breaking Bad.

And despite "being on top," AMC is still a newcomer in the world of original programming and still small potatoes compared with more established competitors. The network costs distributors about 26 cents per subscriber each month, compared to $1.08 and 60 cents for TNT and USA, respectively, according to SNL Kagan.

♦♦♦

A source on Walking Dead says wistfully that if a studio owned the show, the producers might have gotten help in the battles with AMC. In the case of Breaking Bad, Sony responded to the network's decision to cut the number of episodes from 13 to six or eight by shopping the series to FX, which isn't possible with Walking Dead. (Breaking Bad now appears likely to remain on AMC.)

Even when there's a studio involved, the fights have been tough. The conflict with Mad Men creator Matthew Weiner has been abundantly documented and concluded with Weiner getting $10 million per season for up to three more seasons and AMC getting more commercial time. The fracas didn't burnish any reputations with the public. Now sources involved with Breaking Bad are venting displeasure with the network. One says AMC could have dealt with Breaking Bad in a more timely and collaborative manner and come to an easier resolution, adding, "You hate when it comes down to the point where it gets stupid."

Laments a producer on one of the signature shows: "AMC may have had too much success too soon, and they think they know how to do it. But showrunners like Matthew Weiner and [Breaking Bad's] Vince Gilligan are so rare -- you can't replace people like that."

In the case of Walking Dead, AMC has replaced Darabont with executive producer Glen Mazzara, by many accounts a strong talent. But sources associated with the show say Darabont was an integral part of a lightning-in-a-bottle formula that had been working. "Everybody loves Frank and has had an amazing experience," says a talent rep with a client in the mix. "He's brilliant, and we want him there."

According to an insider, many members of the cast and crew feel the same way. "Frank's fingerprints are all over every single aspect of the show," this person says. "I heard a Teamster saying, 'How are we going to do this without Frank?' "

The rupture doesn't make sense for Darabont, either. His other best credit, The Shawshank Redemption, dates to 1994. Despite his public complaints about the grueling hours on the show, Darabont was hardly walking away from Walking Dead.

But AMC's budget-cutting upset him. "Frank doesn't like to see the cast and crew overworked and underpaid," says a show insider. As recently as the end of May, with the show's second season poised to go into production, Darabont seemed to be holding out hope that AMC would relent. "Creatively, I have no complaints thus far," he said at a THR roundtable. "But I believe if they do move ahead with what they're talking about, it will affect the show creatively … in a negative way. Which just strikes me as odd. If  you have an asset, why would you punish it?"

An agency source says Darabont is "notoriously a pain in the ass" known for "taking a feature-film approach to television," which is meant to suggest that he didn't manage the brisk pace of television well. But an insider says Darabont's approach was what made Walking Dead special. "Frank fights for the show," says an insider. "He doesn't just do what the network wants him to do. … He's a filmmaker, and that's why the show was as good as it was." Sources with ties to the show insist it was on schedule and on budget.

♦♦♦

What remains a central mystery, even to those closely involved, is what triggered AMC's move to fire Darabont. As noted, AMC's decision to cut the budget dated to the previous fall, when the network instructed Darabont to produce 13 episodes for a second season, up from six for the first season, for less money. Not only would the show get a lower budget, but AMC also decided that Walking Dead would no longer reap the benefit of a 30 percent tax credit per episode that came with filming in Georgia. Now the network was going to hold on to that money.

At the time, a source says, the show's producers decided not to get into a confrontation. "To have a fight over a number when they didn't know what the show was going to do didn't make sense," says this source. But when Walking Dead began to break AMC records, those involved figured that a negotiation would take place and the cuts might be reduced.

But this source says that AMC had its own ideas about how to make the show more cheaply. The show shoots for eight days per episode, and the network suggested that half should be indoors. "Four days inside and four days out? That's not Walking Dead," says this insider. "This is not a show that takes place around the dinner table." That was just one of what this person describes as "silly notes" from AMC. Couldn't the audience hear the zombies sometimes and not see them, to save on makeup? The source says Darabont fought "a constant battle to keep the show big in scope and style."

Despite the show's success, AMC stuck to its original position on the second-season budget. When those involved with the show protested that the network was taking chances with its biggest hit, AMC's head of original programming, Joel Stillerman, is said to have declared, "Ratings have no bearing on this conversation."

The show went into production on its second season in June. Sources say an early episode came in with footage that was not usable. The director had shot a successful first-season episode and was a mutually agreeed-upon choice. Darabont was editing the episode in an effort to fix it but by then, an insider believes, AMC was looking for a pretext. "Joel thinks he is responsible for the success of shows on AMC, and not the creators," this person says. This person blames Stillerman for the decision to fire Darabont. (Stillerman also has a strained relationship with Mad Men's Weiner, who declines to speak to him.) Through an AMC rep, Stillerman declined comment.

With Walking Dead in the middle of production on its second season, a number of very key and capable players are still involved, including Mazzara, Walking Dead comic creator Robert Kirkman and effects master Greg Nicotero. Only time will tell whether the Dead will suffer when they return or -- who knows? -- maybe even rise. If the show stumbles, many of its most passionate fans will blame AMC for firing Darabont, and he will become an even bigger martyr in their eyes than he already is.          

WHO'S WHO IN THE DISPUTE

    Charlie Collier: AMC's president is finding that success creates its own challenges.
    Joel Stillerman: AMC's head of original programming had ideas about how to keep costs down.
    Glen Mazzara: The man taking over for Darabont joined the show after its first season wrapped.

CORRECTION: In the original version of this story, the ratings for Mad Men and Breaking Bad were transposed. The current version reflects the correct ratings for the two shows.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 11, 2011, 12:35:15 PM
You know, though -- LOL!

I know the rest of the planet liked it, but the show was fucking terrible and, except for the first episode, entirely unwatchable. So all this now is just schadenfreude.

Maybe someone at AMC realizes this and is now killing it Sci-Fi Channel style.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on August 11, 2011, 01:10:56 PM
I tend to agree with the idea presented in the article: That AMC got too big too fast and is now scared of losing all the cash it's made.

But it's a view in to the sticky gears of the thing, no? Tragic, really. Quality gets trumped by nothing but fear of failure. Not failure itself, just fear.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 11, 2011, 01:23:50 PM
I don't buy that at all. AMC isn't some two-bit UPN upstart that bit off more than it can chew. It very carefully reorganized ten years ago, and has followed the course with no difficulty through Mad Men, Breaking Bad, and now The Killing and Walking Dead.

There's a problem here that we're not hearing about -- and it's on the set of Walking Dead, not at AMC. Hell, in terms of getting big, Walking Dead is child's play next to the Mad Men juggernaut.

Nor has AMC feared shutting a series down if it didn't take off. See Rubicon, and The Lot.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 13, 2011, 10:59:45 AM
Interesting update on Bloody Disgusting this morning:

Quote
Not only has Anthrax guitarist Scott Ian put on display an image of him as a zombie (pictured inside) from the set of AMC's now filming second season of "The Walking Dead," more juicy madness is pouring salt on the wounds that has now become a public fist fight. "Sons of Anarchy" producer Kurt Sutter took to his twitter account to share his thoughts on the AMC firing of showrunner/director Frank Darabont. "No one else wants to fucking say it, but the greed of 'Mad Men' is killing the other two best shows on TV - 'Breaking Bad' and 'Walking Dead,' " he said. "Why Darabont got fired - ['Mad Men''s showrunner Matthew] Weiner. He held AMC hostage, broke their bank, budgets were slashed, shit rolled down hill onto Gilligan and Frank." "Darabont reacted strongly to slashed budgets. He made mistakes, he was fired. No creative in town will trust AMC to back up their artists." These sentiments were echoed in our story posted yesterday. You'll find more here. Maybe this public lashing at AMC will embarrass them into doing things correctly?

Links are at: http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/25830
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 02, 2011, 05:30:55 PM
The premiere gets extended...and the season is being split, Doctor Who style.


Quote
The Walking Dead's second season will air in two chunks, AMC announced today, with seven episodes airing this fall and the following six not airing until February. Oh boy, the universally loathed yet necessary cable scheduling model, how we've missed you. The Walking Dead returns October 16 with a 90-minute season premiere, and its winter run kicks off February 12. That season finale should put us right around the premiere of Mad Men, which makes programming sense for AMC if not emotional fan sense for zombie enthusiasts.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 05, 2011, 11:26:02 AM
Okay, trying to summon enough interest to sit down and watch the Walking Dead "sneak peek," which, unlike other sneak peeks this year, is actually a 30 minute episode following bicycle zombie's misadventures.

Season two starts soon, and I'm contemplating whether I want to re-watch season one (now all watch instantly on netflix) or step in front of a bus. I really, really, really want to make Walking Dead work for me... But, god, it's so hard...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 05, 2011, 11:31:03 AM
Everybody else seems to love it.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 05, 2011, 12:00:26 PM
We're all living a lie.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 05, 2011, 03:12:15 PM
Okay! Time for "episode zero" -- "Torn Apart."

Compared to Terra Nova, it's great.

It's also great compared to most of the first season. LOL.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 17, 2011, 07:56:29 PM
Season two! With a vengeance! And the ratings are through the roof...

Already -- signs of better writing. We're down to the RV, one car, and a motorcycle as opposed to last season's one-person-per-car caravan and endless complaints about fuel.

Oh, and, you can barely tear your eyes away from the first 25 minutes. There are some eye rolling moments and the now-expected horrible dialogue, but it's still tense as fuck. Better than anything from last season.

Also better trigger discipline this season. Norman Reedus isn't running around with his cocked crossbow pointing at everyone, he points it at the ground. And Rick has stopped holding his gun by the trigger everytime it's out. They're struggling a bit with the Norman's character, though. He's alternating between antagonist-in-waiting and the redneck with a heart of gold. We know brother Merle is coming back (probably as the Mayor, or the show's equivalent), so...I don't know.

Next week -- Herchell's farm! Maggie! So I guess we'll end the season with them stumbling across the prison.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 23, 2011, 08:17:50 PM
Watching 2.01 again... And now seeing all the flaws. It's still the best episode of the series... But, yeah, Dale doesn't see a horde coming because he's too busy looking in only one direction? The little girl can't see if it's clear to break cover even though she has a 360 degree view? Silent killer Norman Reedus doesn't chase after Rick and the girl? The girl breaks cover -- AGAIN!!!! -- and gets lost? Zombies aren't drawn to the super loud automatic church bells? And haven't ever, apparently, been drawn to them? The group continues to be disunited and talk about breaking up even though it's pretty clear that leaving the group will end in death? Andrea is just now learning how to clean and properly use a gun when they've all been, pretty much, living by the gun for six months? A deer hunter doesn't see a living child in a clearing six months after a zombie apocalypse? Rick doesn't kill the two zombies when (a) they're separated and (b) the one that goes after him is face down in the creek? Instead he leads them on a half mile chase...then kills them when they're back together again?

Oh well... Still a great start for, hopefully, a much better season...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 23, 2011, 08:38:08 PM
Also, I think my whole problem with the zombie apocalypse is that it's so hard to buy when we're such a militarized society. Especially over the last decade. I mean, Parsons, WV has a SWAT team. Any slightly-major urban center is armed to the teeth...especially against an enemy whose only attack is to walk slowly up to you and bite you.

WWZ kind of handled that well -- just simply bad management at the supply/officer level, and overwhelming hordes. But that's the only zombie apocalypse that actually stopped and said, wait, at the slightest sign of trouble, every single urban center larger than 10,000 people is going to have a tank and a few rocket launchers and a wall of machine guns ready.

Walking Dead tries to get around this through the whole "it all happened while our main guy was asleep" routine. Rick wakes up weeks after the apocalypse so...whatever! It happened!

This kind of holds up...if he doesn't run across the actual survivors (and large groups of them) who have been through it all from day one. Because that, then, brings us back to the question of how even an endless horde of slow-moving zombies got the better of a fully militarized America. Last season, both the hospital and the CDC show signs of a full-on battle. So...we're the zombies firing back? Or did the armed forces start firing on each other? And how'd they manage to lose? Man, one guy and a flamethrower could buy enough time to get everyone organized.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 23, 2011, 10:41:36 PM
So, Dropbox it please!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 24, 2011, 07:04:38 AM
Go to AMC's site. One of the few channels that puts their show online without the aid of piracy!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 24, 2011, 08:04:58 AM
Episode two! I'm weirdly giddy as soon as get to Herschell's farm. That was the only good part in the comics...

This episode is mainly the Surgery Episode, so I hope that doesn't mean we're back to the sitzkrieg of season one. How long before we start talking about Maytag washers again?

Meanwhile, back on the highway, Dale and T-Dog have given up keeping lookout and are just raiding cars without a care in the world.  I enjoy how our characters are selectively incautious where the script demands.  It's not exactly an idiot ball. I'm sure there's a branch of that trope that applies to the writers.

So Sophie's been lost in the woods for three days at this point. This despite extensive searching, gunshots, church bells. Though there's not even the slightest discussion that the folks involved in Plotline A should quit.

Let's return to Dale back on the highway  -- WHY AREN'T YOU KEEPING WATCH?!?! Seriously, what the fuck? I couldn't even follow Plotline C at the highway because I kept wanting to scream for them to keep watch. All three plotlines are happening because they just got overwhelmed by a wandering horde! They know the woods are infested! My god, assholes.

Rick and Herschell talk about a cure. Rick, with his still-undisclosed secret knowledge from Dr. Jenner, says that there is no cure. Herschell tells a story that basically boils down to: "that's what they said about AIDS."

Um... Hello! Writers? Oh no! All the writers are zombies! Shoot them!

Rick is falling down and delirious after giving two units of blood.

So, let's review -- the writers have forgotten about the zombie apocalypse, they think AIDS was cured long ago, and they've never given blood or heard of anyone who has.

Let's look at their dialog writing skills:

Back on the highway, there's discussion about leaving for the farm. The problem is Sophia, still missing (after 3 days and extensive searching, remember).

Sophia's mom: What if she comes back and we're not here?

Andrea (turns to the others): If she comes back and we're not here...that would be *awful!*

Really? Gosh. Ya think?

Meanwhile, Shane and Otis expertly distract a horde long enough to get supplies...but fail to think about how they're going to get out again. Cliffhanger! See you next week for more adventures at #whitepeoplesproblemspostapocalypse

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 25, 2011, 06:27:38 PM
Renewed! Of course. Even though it's already off the rails.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 25, 2011, 07:58:18 PM
So, 'cause I'm in France, AMC won't let me watch their content.

DROPBOX please.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Reginald McGraw on October 26, 2011, 10:21:29 PM
Can't you lie to them? Use a proxy or some such?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 26, 2011, 10:25:54 PM
Maybe tell them you aren't a stupid Frog cunt?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 26, 2011, 11:36:09 PM
C'est la vie!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 27, 2011, 07:44:28 AM
So I await the Monkey review...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 27, 2011, 11:31:02 PM
Half way through the first episode of Season Two, I was already tired of the faggot praying/hope thematic -  YOU HAVE NO HOPE, you're in the middle of a zombie apocalypse; no amount of semantic play-about can get away from the meaning of APOCALYPSE - and I cheered when the stupid boy got shot right in his stupid stomach. Shame it wasn't his face. Also, what's with that "MY WIFE DOESN'T KNOW!" crying bullshit? Pull yourself the-fuck-together, man. As if an epistemological crisis of ethics is really going to change your lot in life at this moment. Who do you think you are, fucking Emmanuel Kant? Cunts.

At least the first episode had a vague linear progression without stupid side-missions to do stupid shit in a zombie-infested city, shit that reminds me of playing Fallout: Tactics on the PC when I was 15 years old. GGRRRR - but, as with Season One, I shall persevere because secretly... bla bla bla hate the world.

On to episode two!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 28, 2011, 01:12:13 AM
So, yeah, I'd actually forgotten I'd watched the first half of episode two and had memory-blended it in with the end of episode one which is a great sign, obviously. More whiny praying shit, whining over-analyzing bullshit about the pure concepts of chosen paths of action bla bla bla, like a redneck version of Neo's Matrix Reloaded conversation with The Oracle.

Oh... and there we go! The first side mission: Find hospital equipment. I must have missed rolling that D20. And now they've picked up the fat, bald guy from Jack Black's stupid band.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 28, 2011, 01:18:46 AM
"There's been A accident"

"You don't know that girl! You can't get on that horse!"

I was really hoping that whiny blonde would get eaten by that zombie.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 28, 2011, 01:33:44 AM
Ugh, parental grief and more overly-emotional bullshit. And now the Sheriff looks like an AIDs victim after his second blood transfusion. OH - ha ha! The doctor is actually an animal vet. Best thing yet.

At least the stupid side mission: Find hospital supplies, was kinda fun. Zombies like flares, who'd known?

Cliff-hanger ending. Bastards.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 28, 2011, 07:45:38 AM
LOL.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 31, 2011, 12:11:01 AM
Oh my god...we're still sitting around waiting for the surgery, and hunting for Sophia who's been out in the woods for four nights now.

So, let's see...six episodes at Carl's bedside, right? Describing scenes from the previous episode to each other.

At least there was a little bit of a pay off at the end. Except we all knew Shane was a cunt, so it's less a "wow" moment and more a "yeah, saw that" moment.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 01, 2011, 04:50:40 AM
SPOILER ALERTS.

Third episode and things aren't improving in any way yet: a fat man in a gymnastics room, more whining and crying and introspection, Chinaman asks the redneck about "God" and then starts totally chatting her up after the fat guy pops it. The stupid blonde is still upset because the old guy kept her gun, giving her a good chance to sit on her high horse.

Oh, and more whining, and crying, and faggot deer shit. Shane, of course, turns up just in time to save the stupid deer boy. One question: who wouldn't have shot the fay guy to save their ass from zombies?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 01, 2011, 07:48:14 AM
Don't worry, only five more bedside episodes.

I also love how the wife is suddenly ready to kill her son. Talk about shoehorning shit in there... Just so, apparently, Rick can give his WE HAVE TO LIVE!!! speech. And mention Jenner at least three times an episode because we still need to learn what he whispered to Rick...

You know what's sad? I think episode three is the best that they can do. It sums up all of the writing tactics of the series. This show is probably one of the worst on TV right now... Yet it breaks all the ratings records and the third season is in the bag.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 01, 2011, 01:13:06 PM
It's because people secretly hate themselves.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 07, 2011, 08:37:52 AM
I especially love all the little clumsy mistakes...

Shane's story about Otis has changed. Nobody says anything.

Rick's revolver isn't loaded.

Glenn's binoculars are focused on far away Maggie and Lori is perfectly in focus when she steps in front of him.

The well zombie is incapacitated and T-Dog doesn't help it over the lip to get it clear? He just stands there and watches it break in half? And while we're at it, good thing Glenn got that noose around it's chest. I'll try and not think about how that works.

Inner city boy Glenn can ride a horse!

You notice all the little things because here's yet another episode spent sitting by Carl's bedside. One comedy well zombie (and no one seems too terribly upset that the farm's water supply has been poisoned), one trip into town that's a calm and happy sexual romp, and plenty of meaningful looks. People who read the comic know what those warning looks on the farm are about, and the somewhat sinister-looking barn was a nice touch... So, really, the only interesting parts of this episode were catering to people who already know the whole story and are vaguely interested to see how it's portrayed on screen.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 07, 2011, 01:29:26 PM
Not a valid youtube URL
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 08, 2011, 09:39:45 AM
Haha!

"I don't care about your problems!"
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 08, 2011, 01:11:22 PM
Well...Vulture has not yet given up on Walking Dead, but they do politely hate it.

Quote
While I realize that The Walking Dead is based on a graphic novel that came out in monthly installments, it is increasingly reminding me of a different comic series: Mary Worth. Basically pure camp at this point, Mary Worth has an entertainment value in the fact that, because it’s a daily strip, the action moves at an unintentionally hilariously glacial pace. It can take weeks for the characters to finish a single conversation. The buttoning up of a coat or the locking of a door is treated as a monumental event. Mary Worth gets away with it because it's classic and pure and who would you even send a letter to at this point to complain? The Walking Dead … or as I’m now going to refer to it in my head from here on out, The Walking Around Looking for the Maybe Dead But Who Even Cares Sophia ... is under no such time constraints and really should be able to keep up at least a slightly faster pace than a 70-year-old comic about an elderly apple seller. But then again, Shane and Otis should’ve been able to outrun those lumbering zombies last week too.

The week’s episode begins with Otis’s funeral. It’s a civilized affair, with each survivor placing a rock atop a pile to signify their respect. Hershel asks Shane to speak, and Shane at first answers, “I’m not good at it. Sorry,” which I like to believe was the writers’ way of apologizing (to me personally) for some of the dialogue they’ve given him this season. Shane then tells a half-true, half-dirty, guilt-soaked lie about how Otis died. Otis died a hero, he says, for the greatest reason of all, to save what is now, as Hershel points out, their most precious asset: a child.

Of course, a couple of scenes later Hershel is telling Grimes that’s he’s going to have to pack up that child along with the rest of the last remaining survivors on Earth and send them on their way, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves. First we must discuss the powwow between Hershel and the gang about how to best search for that other most precious pain in the asset, Sophia. Hershel has a handy map of the entire countryside, which looks very Legend of Zelda, and he points out the levels areas where they still haven’t looked. This prompts Daryl to say that he’s going to head back to the creek where he’s already been, and Shane volunteers to return to the stretch of interstate that everyone finally just left. Hershel agrees that this is an excellent plan, except wait, he has one little, tiny suggestion: No one should take their guns. It’s one of the Farm’s rules, which you can excuse us for being slow to pick up on, considering we were introduced to the Farm by way of one of its inhabitants shooting an unarmed little boy, not to mention the ongoing mystery of how the place remains so zombie-free considering it’s the most unfortified homestead in the country.

Or rather, make that the second most. Because what’s less safe than living in a weaponless house ablaze with lights and juicy human activity during a zombie apocalypse? Camping outside that house in a nylon tent. And what’s less safe than camping in that tent? Peeing unnecessarily onto a pregnancy test in a field during the pitch-black night when there is a perfectly nice bathroom inside the house that probably has a door with a lock and everything. (And the house, considering its boundless supply of dramatic-steam-manufacturing hot water, probably has a heated toilet seat, too.)

I will say that I am glad that Glenn is being given more screen time, even though that foreplay conversation made me uncomfortable. Not because it was about sex but because of how perfunctory, insert-sex-scene here it felt. I cannot begin to fathom how he got that noose over the bloated zombies head, but that is the least of my concerns with this show. There was one glorious moment when I was watching the gang fighting over how to pull the rope, and it occurred to me that watching this hapless bunch try to problem solve is like watching something out of an eighties comedy. Imagine the crew in Stripes or the Griswolds in the Vacation movies trying to take on a zombie invasion. Things just got funnier, didn’t they? And suddenly make a whole lot more sense, too.

It is fitting that Daryl found that Cherokee rose, because he remains the great hope of season two. I watched that scene twice, the second time imagining Shane or Grimes giving that speech and realizing I wouldn’t have bought a word of it if they had. So maybe it is Norman Reedus who deserves most of the credit for finding a way to bring his character to life (a character that was one of the shallowest when the show began); something is happening in the Daryl scenes, something real. That moment in the RV with Carol had a stillness to it that I feel the show is ever struggling to achieve. Usually it feels forced, like when Hershel called Grimes over to admire the view (and weirdly lecture him about his religious convictions; for a second I felt that I was watching some sort of 7th Heaven mash-up). If only the show understood more often that reflective doesn’t have to mean just plain slow.

Loose change:

• For those of you in the camp that thinks T-Dog’s blood has been infected, I’d say you were given further ammo in this episode with his talk of “not being me” back at the RV. In keeping with what is attempting to be the show's internal logic, if you were to factor in how Jim’s head was filled with zombie urges once he got scratched, it would make sense that zombie blood poisoning could also poison T-Dog’s thoughts.

• It was subtle (mercifully), but Hershel’s talk of “aspects” of the Farm that he couldn’t discuss is a secret that I’m looking forward to seeing unfold. Here’s hoping it happens sometime in the next three  this season.

• Daryl seems to have given up his search for Merle. Does that mean the show has too? And how does that then affect the fate of Morgan and his son and their most promising story line?

• Perhaps a less pressing mystery than the others, but: What could Lori have possibly written on that piece of paper that wasn’t “pregnancy test”? Did she really specify a particular brand? And why a shopping list at all? Wouldn’t you at this point have cleaned out the town of anything remotely useful? And finally, you do realize that Shane and Otis could’ve probably found a respirator in that old-timey-yet-medically-equipped-could-not-be-more-opposite-of a-high-school-swarming-with-zombies pharmacy, right?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 09, 2011, 02:41:36 PM
Yay! Episode 4 where nothing happens. Except for some side-boob.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 09, 2011, 03:30:06 PM
Yay! Episode 4 where nothing happens. Except for some side-boob.

I agree with Vulture about how weird that sex scene was. And the whole mission for the pregnancy test.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 11, 2011, 02:23:59 AM
Yay! Episode 4 where nothing happens. Except for some side-boob.

I agree with Vulture about how weird that sex scene was. And the whole mission for the pregnancy test.

Yeah, I gathered from the girl telling the old dude, "it is done" that the sex thing was to make emotional ties with the helpful Asian kid and keep him with their group. Also, I wasn't aware sheriff-guy's whore-wife would have been in so much of a rush to wait for a few more weeks to miss a second period. But, wait... DRAMA AT SUNSET!

Ugh.

This is turning into a worse shit-storm that Heroes.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 11, 2011, 08:36:53 AM
Sadly, you're reading too much into the sex scene. Maggie and Glen end up together in the comics.

What's weird is that it's one of the few sub-plots in the comics that's actually kind of naturalistic and touching. They slowly end up together, and struggle with it.

Herschell, as we gathered from heavy-handed scenes in this last episode, wants them ALL gone as soon as possible. This is because he has a secret.

What's upsetting is that they're almost going meta with the comic storyline. If you watch certain scenes carefully -- Herschell's reaction to what to do about Sophia if she's a zombie, and Maggie's reaction to the well walker -- you can figure out their secret. For those of us reading the comics, we know... But, in the comics, the big reveal was unexpected. The whole thing was subtle. We had no clue.

The comics are terribly written. Embarrassing, actually. Almost just a find-replace each issue using the exact same formula over and over. Yet they're more artful than this fucking show. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 11, 2011, 12:09:44 PM
Sadly, you're reading too much into the sex scene. Maggie and Glen end up together in the comics.

The TV show clearly makes something out of the sex scene: why else would the young lady give the old dude a meaningful glance, telling him that the sex, "it is done"?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 11, 2011, 01:24:02 PM
Sadly, you're reading too much into the sex scene. Maggie and Glen end up together in the comics.

The TV show clearly makes something out of the sex scene: why else would the young lady give the old dude a meaningful glance, telling him that the sex, "it is done"?

Did your download have an extra scene? Because mine doesn't have that. She tells Glen it was a one time thing and not to mention it, Hsrschell asks if it all went okay, she says "Fine. Nothing happened." and then heads inside.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 14, 2011, 03:36:55 PM
RC style review!

Episode five: Chupacabra

Previously, on Walking Dead: Sophia's lost. Lori's got brand loyalty for her pregnancy kits. In case you fell asleep.

Then we move into a very strong opening -- a flashback to Lori, Shane and some of the others stranded in traffic outside Atlanta, which they then see get napalmed Strange that there was no evidence/mention of that last season. You'd think they'd talk about that, or that there'd be, at least, some damage but...well, nevermind! I'm just happy that there's a hint of action! Jesus.

I was kind of hoping for a full-on flashback episode.  But, alas, no... After the titles, we're back to the sitzkrieg. It's the fourth day Sophia's been lost (though I've counted six nights since she vanished, you naughty writers) and they're finally getting around to a proper grid search. Because a half-catatonic little girl who, at this point, we can't even remember obviously has more than a snowball's chance of survival in the zombie apocalypse.

I guess there's not much to do while Carl recovers. Might as well waste all of our time week after week.

Now, to give them credit, the validity of the search is questioned by Shane, who does spell out how fucking absurd, you know, the show is. I mean the search.

Overall, this is the best episode of the season. Though I hate how they're handling Daryl. Yet another example of how clumsy and two-dimensional the story is... They have to force Daryl as the antagonist after ignoring his issues for five episodes.

And, finally, the big barn reveal! Which even people who haven't read the comics should have guessed long ago.






Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 15, 2011, 08:26:29 PM
Episode 5 review:

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, blonde bitch. They clearly told you to not attempt to shoot the zombie from a fucking half-mile away when you are a fire-arms novice, especially when they will be running towards it.

I secretly hope the zombies break out from the barn house and we see every character being devoured in minute detail. I'd especially like to see young Carl's death rattle. That would make me smile. Hopefully the blonde would shoot herself in the face, but fail to kill herself, so that she can do naught but silently suffer the pain of being eaten alive. That, too, would make me smile.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 15, 2011, 08:30:47 PM
When you find yourself kind of rooting for the fever dream vision of a redneck Aryan Brotherhood psychopath because he's the most likable character, then you know the show has a problem.

I was like, yes, Michael Rooker! Maybe he'll eat some babies or something. Please.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 21, 2011, 08:38:40 AM
Episode 6 -- Secrets:

Glen decides not to tell anyone? Really? He's been through life and death with his gang for, what, seven months? So he sides with the psychopaths instead? Thankfully his hesitation only lasts 11 agonizing minutes. But then the reveal doesn't lead to the blow up it should... Instead Dale goes to talk to Herschell. There's talking, reasoning about having fucking killer zombies in the barn. No! You're crazy asshole! We're burning the barn -- and you!

But...God forbid we actually have any sort of forward motion!

The only real action this season is watching them toss the Idiot Ball to each other.

What do I really love? The whole Shane and Andrea thing... Right down to following her with the car after she stalks off. And then -- "I got a lead on Sophia. Let's go check it out."

REALLY? When was that? Are there 13 hours of searching for Sophia webisodes airing in between each episode or something? I mean, it seems like there is anyway...

You know the mistake they're making? It's second season OG Survivors. Where otherwise okay people who don't seem to be bad off sit around and talk about the apocalypse from the comfort of a country manor house. The only real discomfort is that they're forced to associate with each other and use candles.

There is the very rare reminder that civilization has ended and things are bad, but it comes two or three times a season.

However...that was the format for Survivors. This is a zombie apocalypse. Not only do we need action, but the characters need to remember that. Why do Glen and Maggie show no caution at all when they go into town? Why don't they clear the building?

You know, it all boils down to the taglines on the Vulture recaps. Here's what this show is about:


Quote
A brief moment of zombie fishing mercifully interrupts a whole lot of pontificating.

Quote
Going for a buzz cut is just one of the choices talked about this week.

Quote
A new homestead tends to Carl, while Grimes makes a nonsensical stand.

Now...do we talk about the ending of this episode? It just sort of runs out. Blah blah blah, done.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 21, 2011, 11:53:43 PM
Season 2, Episode 6:

Where to start: walkers are people too?

Pregnancy is now a 'medical condition'; teaching kids how to shoot; that stupid, stupid, blonde bint is now some kind of shooting ace, and even more side missions endangering the participants lives for stupid objectives. How long has one little girl been missing amidst a world full of brain-hungry zombies?

Maybe the kid will shoot himself in the face, and I know hate almost every single character in this show. Those I don't hate, I regard with apathy. As for the burgeoning romance between Charlie Chan and whining girl whore.... Like I said last week, I hope to see every character eaten by zombies.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 22, 2011, 01:57:01 AM
I can't recall any show that made me hate the main characters as much as this show.

And, yes! We're now into week two, in-show time, since Sophia went missing! Even though the writers lost count and made it four days last week despite the fact that we had seen six agonizingly boring, pointless nights pass and one character has fully recovered from a stomach wound.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 22, 2011, 02:01:59 AM
Oh, and, the Vulture recap... I love how Vulture is in the same boat as we are. They gave up on Terra Nova, but are weirdly trapped watching Walking Dead. Partially in the hopes something will happen, but mainly because they're baffled at how bad it is.

Quote

This week’s opening functioned like an adrenaline shot to my weary heart. At the sight of all those undead relatives in the barn, I, too, briefly, came to life. Of course, the reason I was dead in the first place was because of the initial scene where Carl says, “Everything’s food for something else” and Lori looks way too aghast at the loss of her little boy’s innocence considering they are on a farm and have been eating chickens themselves and little kids who grow up in farm during non-zombie-soaked times learn this lesson and turn out just fine. And I certainly wasn’t pleased at the way Carl’s statement was then very literally demonstrated in the next scene when Otis’s widow breaks the legs of a couple of chickens, priming them to be food for “something else.” (Also, why did she have to break their legs at all? Non-crippled chickens are too crafty for a pack of zombies?) But still, look, zombies! Right at the top of the hour, too, not shambling out 36 minutes in like they’d overslept and were late for work.

Oh, the hopes I had for that barn zombie plot. Not because of anything the show has actually done, but more the just the very idea of them. For me, the most emotionally grounded moment of the entire series has always been the sight of Morgan staring down the barrel of his gun at his beloved wife now turned zombie, trying to will himself to pull the trigger. I loved how real that conflict felt and how genuinely sad I felt. Back then, the show still knew how to linger on a moment and you were able to get a nice good look at her, long enough to get a glimpse of the woman she must have been before she was bit.

Zombies have an illustrious history as metaphors for “something else,” and when I first saw Morgan’s wife, I thought the metaphor for this show was going to be a degenerative disease like Alzheimer’s. Losing your loved one or your own mind to a zombie bite felt akin to this terrifying real world ailment, which impressed me because I’d never seen zombies done quite that way before. But then in a twist that I definitely did not see coming, the show suffered its own bout of dementia, forgetting the Morgan plotline entirely as well as most of its other ones before finally settling into the quiet family drama that it now most definitely is. You can’t have zombie metaphors without zombies, even Grimes could tell you that. Of course, he’d tell it to you in the most tortured way possible, pausing so often to look pained and clench that lower part of his jaw that finally you’d just be like, “Enough! I don’t even want to know anymore.”

So when I saw that widow woman (let’s call her Carol 2.0) feeding those barn zombies their breakfast, it did feel like a return to form. I did a ceremonious readjustment of my couch cushions during the opening credits in order to properly settle in for what was surely going to be a zombie-heavy episode. I felt a mixture of relief that the episode might actually be a good one so I could write something positive about it for once.

But wait, what’s this? Why is that newest pissed off female character stomping angrily over to Glenn, her face contorted with unearned self-righteous anger? And why is Glenn promising her he’s not going to tell anyone about the zombies in the barn. If he doesn’t tell anyone, then no one will know and that means no zombies and that’s just not possible. You can’t start an episode with a barn full of zombies and then not make that episode about those zombies. And why is Glenn now talking to Lori about her pregnancy? Obviously that’s less important than the zombies, right? Obviously that’s going to be the only scene where the pregnancy is mentioned right? Because surely the writers realize that there is only one more episode before the show breaks for the winter and there is still so much ground to cover, so many questions to answer, like: What exactly is the zombie virus? Is the whole world infected? Is the president a zombie? Are those old people still alive? And the No. 1 question of all: Why does this show hate zombies?

It goes without saying, but none of those questions get answered this episode. Instead Shane and Grimes give the gang … plus that new kid … shooting lessons. It has been pointed out before that people in zombie movies and shows always seem to exist in a world where there have never been any zombie movies and shows. But the Walking Dead writers seem to have also never seen a movie montage before, because if they had they surely would have learned how to speed up their training session. The fact that they have devoted several episodes to this is unacceptable, and if there were an address that I could send an angry letter to about it, I would. When Shane said, “I’d say she got the hang out it,” and Grimes answered, with a laugh, “I’d say she’s ready for the advance class,” I thought it was just a standard Walking Dead attempt at trying to convince us that Grimes and Shane are friends by way of showing us their casual, good-old-boy-tinged banter but no, Grimes was serious.  There actually is an advanced class. But then, why the laugh? Does Grimes find it as hilarious as I do that we really are going to spend half of this episode watching Andrea come into her own as the gunslinger that she has always wanted to be ever since her sister turned into a zombie, like, two weeks ago?

While we’re on the subject of Andrea, is she even allowed to be so nostril flaring on this subject considering she shot one of their own people the day before? Did she not learn any humility from that? And what happened to the limited bullets and the zombies being attracted to gunshots? Also, Carl is the new Andrea now, all demanding his gun? It’s bad enough that the show is full of one-dimensional characters, but now they seem to be aping each other, making them more like one-half-dimensional. Otis’s widow is basically Carol. Glenn’s girlfriend is a younger version of Lori. That new Hershel daughter person is the new Sophia, since I couldn't care less if she gets eaten by a zombie or not.

All this nonsense eats up 25 minutes of the episode. Then Glenn and Maggie take a trip into town to pick up Lori’s newest request. They ride horses because it feels more romantic or because Hyundai, or whatever Shane’s “new ride,” wouldn’t pony up a second car. And of course there is not one mention of the possibility of zombies. A zombie attack is so far down on their list of concerns that I’m sure Maggie would have shot you a way out of proportion dirty look if you had even mentioned the possibility to her. Which is especially weird since the whole horse ride all she and Glenn do is talk about zombies. It’s actually a fairly nice moment when he asks her what she calls them instead of walkers and she answers, “Mom … Sean … Mr. and Mrs. Fisher.” Again, I felt that pang for what this show could be (although I’m confused about why we’re supposed to not remember that Maggie bludgeoned that one zombie to death with a baseball bat. If the show wanted to convince us that she’s some naive girl who never killed a zombie, they probably shouldn’t have introduced her to us by having her do just that). And then inside the pharmacy, when the zombie grabs her wrist, that was exactly the kind of B-movie zombie move (in a good way) that this show should be full of. I would’ve loved for it to go on longer, with that zombie just refusing to die. What’s the fun of having the bad guys be the undead if you can kill them so very easily? Same goes for the housing development scene, which mostly just made me furious on Otis’s behalf. Shane and Andrea were surrounded just like Shane and Otis were at the high school and yet this time not only do both people survive but Shane even has time to give Andrea another shooting lesson. Oh, and they don’t find Sophia.

The episode wraps up with a bunch of secrets coming out, sort of, and none of them being the one good zombie secret. (Dale knows, but who cares.) Maggie, Dale, and Glen wage a not so subtle pro-life campaign toward Lori, who swallows a handful of morning-after pills (I know that’s what they are because the box clearly says it) and then runs to her favorite pregnancy-dealing-with spot in the woods to vomit them up. Grimes finds the empty box of pills and because he too can read, and realizes what they are for and he runs and finds Lori. They proceed to clench and stare off and gulp and don’t pull their hair away from their face even though it must be so annoying to always have it down during a zombie apocalypse and basically rehash a conversation they already had three episodes ago and then finally Lori says, “Shane and I ... ” and holy Hershel’s miracles, Grimes responds with what is actually a nicely understated, “I know. Of course I know.” And nearby in his tent, Daryl tries to get into a book called The Case of the Missing Man and he hopes that that missing man is not him because good Lord, we’re going to need him next week.

Loose change:

One episode to go and T-Dog has barely spoken all season. He’s still wearing that bandage and so there’s a faint chance that the possible zombie blood poisoning story line could still introduced.
How can Carl be “barely on his feet” and yet still be off shooting guns? And did it strike anyone else as cruel that Daryl has to sleep in a tent while he’s convalescing instead of inside the house in one of the many guest bedrooms? If there were a zombie attack on that Farm … oops, never mind, I forgot that zombies don’t go there.  I wonder why Hershel is even bothering to put up that barbed-wire fence. Seems like a waste of resources. He should’ve built it out of bullets. There are plenty of those to go around.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 28, 2011, 01:09:03 AM
2.7: Pretty Much Dead Already

The penultimate episode, thank god. Except the finale won't air till mid-February. What the fuck is up with that? A hiatus of two and a half months for one episode?

Glen finally tells everyone that there are walkers in the barn. This results in almost incomprehensible confusion. Break for credits. Return to, apparently, days later during a period unrelated to the argument that starts the show where everyone is pretty much calm again.

I guess the writers can't even string seven minutes of script together without completely losing the thread. But! Whatever! Renewed for 17 seasons!

In other news...we've spent THE WHOLE SEASON looking for Sophia. I wonder if anyone else thinks this is a problem? It's the writers' way of keeping them at the farm...but...why? Because they don't need a reason to stay at the farm. Any normal person would stay at the farm.

I love the absurd scene where Herschel and Rick go out to retrieve walkers who appear to have been caught in the mud for six months. Even though this has been known to the farm folk (why haven't they recovered them?) they're just now going to get them and using the episode to preach to Rick.

The whole thing is insane. They went through enormous trouble to explain this outside of the context of the comics with the CDC interlude, and Jenner explaining it, and whispering his secret to Rick... So Rick has more knowledge about what's happened than anyone. Yet he hasn't divulged this yet. He's...playing along, I guess. I don't know.

Or is season two a retcon and the whole thing with Jenner has been erased?

The finale, though, is what this show should have been all along. The emotion...the horror... It's great. It's amazing. And all it does is make me mad that it took seven episodes to produce three good minutes.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 29, 2011, 02:57:28 PM
Season two, episode 7:

Please! please, kind zombies, break out of the barn and eat them all. I want little Carl to go first, over analyzing his woe in a way no 10yo ever who would.

Wait... season highlight: zombies are freed from the barn by crazy, pussy hungry Shane so the original cast members can indulge in some 'walker killin' before we see the entire seasons quarry - stupid, fucking Sophia - stumble out from the barn and into light of mild joy as good guy Rick shoots another young girl in the face. RIGHT IN HER FACE.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2011, 03:00:42 PM
When Sophia was revealed, I know it was supposed to be a shocking, emotional scene. And it was...but only in a cathartic way. Thank fucking god! Seven goddamned hours searching for her and nothing else happening! YES!!! SHOOT HER!!! LET ME SHOOT HER!!!!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 29, 2011, 04:48:07 PM
Yeah, thank fuck for that.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2011, 04:57:53 PM
And we still don't know what Jenner said! It's maddening, really. I hate this show.

But... The February finale should be them finding the prison. The prison is kind of awesome and kind of horrible. It's horrible because they sit there for 30 issues doing nothing (like the show has done for two seasons) and it's awesome because they're surrounded by a Dawn of the Dead-level horde. And 70% of the cast dies horribly.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 29, 2011, 06:02:17 PM
Why don't they just shoot the old doctor in his face, and take over the farm?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2011, 06:53:55 PM
Why don't they just shoot the old doctor in his face, and take over the farm?

In the comics they agree to disagree. Herschel believes there's a cure, and you get the "they're people" speech. Rick and company actually leave things as they are, with a few defectors joining them.

Then everything goes to hell at the farm and a few survivors escape and join Rick's crew, now ensconced at a nearby prison. Most of the survivors are just redshirts, though, so we can end the prison arc with a giant mass-kill. (Which includes Lori getting a shotgun abortion.)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 29, 2011, 07:15:27 PM
Can't wait for that.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2011, 08:32:53 PM
Can't wait for that.

It's the only reason I'll watch the third season.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 29, 2011, 08:54:38 PM
Can't wait for that.

It's the only reason I'll watch the third season.

I watch it because I need to be punished.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2011, 09:01:06 PM
Jesus. Nobody deserves that punishment.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 29, 2011, 09:09:27 PM
Parisian streets glow darkly.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 09, 2012, 01:10:56 PM
Oh, right. Season 2.5 starts up on Saturday. Yawn.

Not a valid youtube URL
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on February 09, 2012, 11:10:34 PM
They still have funding?

Bah, I suppose I'll have to watch it anyway - punish myself for the demons etc.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 13, 2012, 08:42:10 AM
Episode eight liveblog!

In almost Sci-Fi Channel awkwardness, we pick up at the very moment where the cliffhanger for the first half of the season left off. Which is in the middle of the action, just a heartbeat after Rick shoots what's her name in the face.

Nice to relive that scene, actually, since I wanted to be shot in the face several times as they spent seven episodes searching for the little bitch.

The argument that follows has Shane condemning Rick for wasting time with the search for the little girl, complaining violently about how torturous the last seven episodes have been for the characters, as well! I can't help but wonder if they're kind of hanging a lampshade there. I'm going to pretend that they've realized their wrongs and, now, the show is going to take a turn for the better.

Of course...that's not the case. Instead they while away the hours complaining about the search, and the choices made, and how useless they all are, and digging graves for the zombies, and crying about what to do next.

Herschel starts drinking again in his grief...and...heads out to...the local bar...and Rick has to go after him...and...

Okay. Shoot me in the face. Please.

We then move into conversations about love, and an argument at the bar, and Lori driving off alone and getting into a stupid accident that makes no sense...

At the bar, they run into a couple of assholes who, more or less, are there to illustrate the point that Rick isn't evil -- everyone else is. The whole scene is weirdly shoehorned in and makes little sense. So these guys are randomly at the same deserted town in the middle of the deserted countryside as Herschel? And then they have this weird conversation where they're established as some two-dimensional threat so now Rick must be a cold-blooded killer in order to save the community he and everyone else are considering leaving?

And I hope Lori gets eaten. Preferably before the next episode.  Oh, but, no, then they'll spend the rest of the season searching for her.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on February 13, 2012, 09:25:58 AM
Ugh, I don't want to watch this any more....
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 21, 2012, 11:54:17 AM
Sunday's episode barely even registered when I watched it yesterday. We certainly got more action, but it was all stupid. It barely distracted us from the eternal melodramatic whinging about their lot in life. And I still ask the question -- how come walkers don't come to the farm? Especially considering the shootout at the barn? And people driving their cars and trucks around more often than forgetful yuppies hosting a dinner party? This is starting to veer into Survivors remake territory -- where they have the perfect HQ and plenty of gas and always freshly washed cars.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on February 21, 2012, 02:39:51 PM
I forgot about last week's episode. I'll watch it now to make my brain hurt.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 21, 2012, 04:01:10 PM
I really don't know why you would want to watch it. I'm doing it because I'm chained up in a Dante-like hell.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 05, 2012, 10:53:57 AM
So we spent last night's episode debating whether or not they should kill the guy they rescued two episodes back. Who, by the way, has a limp this episode -- but did not last episode -- despite the fact that his leg was destroyed when it was impaled on a fence post. He was up and walking within a day.

So, anyway, the humanity of whether or not to kill him consumes the entire episode. And they ultimately can't decide!

Meanwhile, Carl accidentally frees a zombie that was stuck in the mud and it eventually gets back to the farm and kills Dale, who, despite being on patrol for zombies, and despite finding a cow freshly killed by a zombie, gets taken by surprise and dies.

PS: IT'S THE ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE, GUYS! HELLO!!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 14, 2012, 07:30:03 AM
The penultimate episode was just as boring as all the rest...even though it shouldn't have been, people died, and we finally got some comeuppance. It ends on Sunday thank god!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 14, 2012, 08:52:15 PM
Who is dead so far?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 15, 2012, 07:48:37 AM
Dale because he was surprised by a zombie while on zombie patrol in a big empty mowed field, and Shane because he went crazy, tried to kill Rick, then got killed by Rick, then came back and got killed by Carl.

Now a horde is coming because they heard that ONE gunshot and not the fucking Battle of the Bulge-level of noise in gunshots and construction and people screaming and car repair and roaring engines that has been going on the last six episodes. Nor have they followed the constant wandering idiots who meander through the woods, or are always out driving around town. Nor are they attracted to the mysterious well-lit farm.

Oh, but Carl shoots a gun? HORDE!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 15, 2012, 08:57:17 PM
So, Dale the old dude is dead, or is Dale the red-neck? I've forgotten so quickly.

Shane is dead at the hands of Rick, Carl is the stupid shit-son, yeah?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 16, 2012, 10:59:50 AM
Dale's the old dude. He died after becoming the sole voice of reason in regards to whether or not they should execute the guy they captured during the wild three-episode arguing-in-the-living-room arc. God, that was some gripping TV. Circular arguments in a farmhouse and intense close-ups of people reacting to arguments! Followed by a cooling down period where the women hang laundry and pace slowly back and forth.

Yes and yes to the other questions.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 16, 2012, 11:56:21 AM
Ugh.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 19, 2012, 08:31:59 AM
Finale!

Daryl's back to walking around with an arrow in his crossbow all the time, including when in the house and talking to people. And he casually holds it in a way that'll kill him or someone near him if there's a misfire.

So a herd of zombies is approaching and everyone has a chance to flee but they don't.

"This is my farm! I'll die here!

"Alright...it's as good a night as any."

What?

What I really like is how there's someone on the farm I've never seen before. It's like they created a character (and he's a redshirt with one line) for just this episode, but they all act like he's always been there. It's bizarre.

Also...let's count how often Herschel shoots his shotgun without reloading. 15...16....17....18...19... There we go! reload.

Then one of the women get torn to pieces...we hear her screams after the herd rips out her neck and pulls her to the ground. So if she has no throat...how's she still screaming?

What's awesome is that the huge apocalyptic loss of the farm sees no deaths of the regular cast...just the farm people who have never mattered. So now it's becoming that show...where nobody is ever really in danger except the redshirts, or if they've been the antagonist for two seasons.

The rendezvous is back where they started on the highway...they've either planned this or they all just assume that's the plan because they all are independently trying to get back to that spot after splitting up in the night... Which then fuels the desperation of this episode because, apparently, the highway only has one exit in this county and they have to get past the herd to get there.

Rick and Carl and Herschel make it, of course, because we need someone to be waiting somewhere and arguing about pointless things.

What's great is that Rick changes his position. In one scene he's arguing against Herschel waiting on the highway, then we come back and Herschel says they can't stay on the highway for much longer and Rick says, "What, you're just going to leave them? Your daughters?"

Luckily, everyone arrives at the same time before the argument continues.

While Andrea races for her life, one of the cars in Rick's convoy runs out of gas. So they stop and decide to make camp so that they can make a gas run in the morning...except they have two working vehicles and it's daytime. So... Why not go get gas right then?  No, because "God forbid if something happens and we don't have a car."

Okay...then send Daryl on his motorcycle. Why not? He can probably find gas within an hour and then you're on your way.

But, no! We can't split up! We need to make a fire and set a perimeter!

We finally find out what Jenner whispered to Rick last season. The secret? That they're all infected and...they'll...turn into zombies when they die. Like, duh.

This, however, is a big revelation and everyone is stunned. Maybe they didn't notice that it's the zombie apocalypse?

Rick confesses to killing Shane and Lori is horrified and angry...even though, just a few episodes ago, she was trying to convince Rick to kill him.

Enter Michonne! Finally. So that's Andrea saved.

We end with the prison just over the next rise...and, see you idiots next fall.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 20, 2012, 12:06:15 AM
Ugh.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 14, 2012, 05:28:38 PM
Season three trailer for this stupid motherfucking show.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 26, 2012, 11:02:57 AM
So we're a month away from the premiere of season three and AMC just fucking renewed the show for a fourth season? God... What is it with Walking Dead? Is the showrunner a Russian oil tsar or something? I'll give AMC eighty billion dollars if they renew the show sight unseen!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on September 28, 2012, 08:28:24 AM
I can't believe they're still making that shit.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 05, 2012, 10:28:44 AM
New promo:


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 10, 2012, 09:13:29 PM
Ugh.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 11, 2012, 10:40:11 AM
Not a valid youtube URL
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 15, 2012, 08:37:36 AM
Well...the third season premiere was, surprisingly, great. This was achieved through the clever use of two things: (1) There's no dialogue for the first six and a half minutes, and it's tense and brilliant. and (2) The whole episode is spent clearing the prison.

Luckily for the next couple episodes, they still have lots of prison clearing to do. Then dealing with the aftermath. So, if we're very, very lucky, the season won't be about being cooped up in the prison selling Maytag products.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 16, 2012, 01:10:36 PM
Quote
Last night, the third-season premiere, "Seed," racked up 10.9 million viewers and a powerful 5.7 demo rating. When you factor in the encore showings late last night, the episode was seen by more than 15 million people (and that's not even counting the people who recorded it to watch later), a number second only to prime-time football viewership on the night.

You know...it's tough. I want to complain about this but I also should applaud it. The Walking Dead is breathing new life into the PA genre...and that's a good thing. Because, otherwise, we'll go 20 years with nothing by Stargate or Star Trek clones before someone tries PA again.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 22, 2012, 09:26:31 AM
Episode two and still holding strong. Still in prison cleanup mode. Next week will be all about awesome Michonne and whiny Andrea with the Governor. So that should keep the pace going...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 22, 2012, 10:32:54 PM
I gave up half-way through season 2. Should I get back on the boat?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 23, 2012, 10:51:30 AM
I gave up half-way through season 2. Should I get back on the boat?

So far, I'd say yes. But...we're only two episodes in, and I'm really gun-shy after season two. I don't want to make a judgement until the end of the season.

Basically, here's the difference between season two and three:

In the comics, all the shit on the farm lasted for about 3 issues...yet they took an entire season to deal with it. In the comics, all the shit with them getting set up at the Prison lasted 6-7 issues. They covered it all in about 40 minutes.

So there's a massive upgrade to the pacing. Episode three sets up the big bad, and it's all pretty rockin' from there if they stay at this speed. Also, they're all done with talking. The bulk of our crew is now bloodthirsty and not at all hesitant when it comes to dealing with bad blood. Again, what would be an alpha male head to head that would have lasted a season in the first two seasons, was dealt with in about 25 minutes in episode two. No problem.

Also, the last of the annoying characters -- Andrea -- is in Movie B at the moment and wandering with Michonne. We see her only briefly (though next week is all about her).

So...yes. Season three is worth watching so far. And, best of all, you don't need to know what happened in the previous seasons.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 23, 2012, 10:22:56 PM
Dropbox please.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 04, 2012, 12:07:22 PM
Catching up with episode three... Introducing: The Governor. Who is an irrational psychopath whose motivations make little sense, just like in the comics.

And it's an Andrea episode, so that makes it even harder.

But, still better than the last two seasons!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 05, 2012, 12:56:42 AM
Episode four. Even with the hated Andrea stuff in Plot B, this show remains strong. Plot A at the prison is just awesome. And gripping. And emotional.

I'm continually shocked at how this show has improved so dramatically. I guess now it's clear why they fired everyone. Season three is almost some strange species of reboot in terms of storytelling, drama, and characterization.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 12, 2012, 09:49:27 AM
Jesus. Andrea's the worst character ever. She's still in Plot B, but even that is too much to swallow most of the time.

The prison stuff remains awesome...even if this episode was spent with them noisily getting baby formula and passively watching Rick lose his mind.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 19, 2012, 08:23:47 AM
Hate Andrea so much.

Also, let's have no one react to a gun going off right next to their ear in a prison cell.

Oh, and, let's not shoot Merle on sight!

Did they fire all the writers again mid season?

Did we ever have writers?

Anyway, still better than the FIND SOPHIA!!! season.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 26, 2012, 11:28:32 AM
Next Sunday is the mid-season final. And, man, this season has kept up. Which is amazing considering how awful this show was. I can't believe we're moving up on episode eight and I'm still engaged.

What's next? Watchable episodes of True Blood? No, probably not, because the entire cast will have to die.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 26, 2012, 11:47:20 AM
What's next? Watchable episodes of True Blood? No, probably not, because the entire cast will have to die.

I lol'd.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 03, 2012, 08:10:36 AM
Mid season finale was pretty awesome. Two month hiatus!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on December 03, 2012, 03:06:12 PM
Boom. I'll grab that from DB and get onto them over Xmas probably.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on January 03, 2013, 11:59:21 AM
So, very pleasantly surprised by how good I found season three of The Walking Dead to be this time around.

One can tell writers were fired and replaced pretty wholesale.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 03, 2013, 12:29:04 PM
So, very pleasantly surprised by how good I found season three of The Walking Dead to be this time around.

One can tell writers were fired and replaced pretty wholesale.

Yeah, no shit. It's like a new show.

Now...let's see if they can handle the back-end just as well starting next month. Though it's just going to be War with Woodbury, isn't it? Can't go wrong there.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 22, 2013, 11:17:12 AM
Man...the ever troubled Walking Dead. So Season 3 revitalized the show. But...

Quote
Is The Walking Dead allergic to showrunners? After Frank Darabont left in season two, his successor Glen Mazzara jumped ship the following year. His exit brought AMC under fire for not only him, but all their personnel. Now an AMC exec has fired back.

Over the past few years, AMC's bumped heads with producers from most of its shows. After Mazzara left, his peers Shawn Ryan and Kurt Sutter (whom he worked with on The Shield) took the network to task.

On WhoSay, Sutter wrote:

"AMC is run by small-minded, bottom-line thinkers who have no appreciation or gratitude for the effort of it's creative personnel. Time and time again we see events like what happened today with Glen Mazzara. They continue to disrespect writers, sh-t on their audience and bury their network... Showrunners are not development executives, we're not cookiecutter douchebags that you plug into a preexisting model. TWD will suffer."

Those are fighting words! AMC boss Josh Sapan is aware of the criticism but insists in a new interview with The Hollywood Reporter the network isn't as bad as they say:

"We really do believe that people who make great TV shows have a rare capability, and we hold them in extraordinarily high regard. Certainly it would be preferable to have as much continuity as possible. We'll forge ahead and hope to make great shows and be the best place to work. We'll do the best we can to be an environment where the best creative people can flourish. We'll hopefully learn from everything we do."

He also reiterated that Mazzara's exit was a mutual decision, which was the network's line when the shakeup was first announced. Do you think there's more to the story?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 02, 2013, 12:08:42 PM
Feb 10th! Just watched a trailer for the back half of the season and, wow, looks awesome. Can't wait.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 07, 2013, 11:24:36 AM
Sunday night f-f-freakout!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 13, 2013, 10:02:57 PM
Here's two hot blonde twins playing the theme song on portable harps.

Because that's what Walking Dead is really about...


Not a valid youtube URL
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on February 14, 2013, 12:03:35 PM
I guess I need to try out this show again?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 14, 2013, 12:07:33 PM
I guess I need to try out this show again?

Just season three.

And, apparently, just the first half of season three.

You have plenty of time. I think it's been auto-renewed through 2020 because it's immortal.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 20, 2013, 08:38:45 AM
I love that they've sort of reached this mediocre plateau and are now clinging there by their fingernails. Season three remains better than the last two seasons but, really, deep down, if you look at it straight on, it's still crap.

But! Whatever. Two more episodes to go, then we can ignore this show for a year.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 20, 2013, 12:18:20 PM
The first half of this third season was pretty good, the second half has been passable, but yeah - certainly a lot better than the piece of shit second season.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 28, 2013, 03:04:35 PM
I never thought I would say this during the first two seasons, but I'm downright excited for the third season finale. It's going to be (had better be) the big war between the Prison and Woodbury. This is like the buildup in Game of Thrones for the battle of King's Landing. They delivered in spectacular fashion.

The showdown between Rick and the governor in the comics was apocalyptic, and probably led to the best mini-arc in the whole atrocious comic series -- Rick and his annoying son wandering alone and Rick being totally off his rocker. (Then all the survivors magically reunite and head to Northern Virginia...)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 29, 2013, 01:16:56 AM
I can't wait!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 29, 2013, 11:24:42 AM
I can't wait!

The guy who plays Rick says that the bodycount (of living people) is 27 for the finale. Considering that Merle did a good job eliminating redshirts last week, I expect some named characters to go down. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 29, 2013, 01:45:34 PM
I'm guessing that 27 will be mostly ensign A-to-B from the 'redshirts' seeing as Rick only has, what... 8 people?

After that, there is only the Governor, Milton, and stereotype "Rodriguez" military guy as named characters from Woodbury, other than those Johnny-come-lately black guy and woman.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 29, 2013, 01:56:28 PM
I'm guessing that 27 will be mostly ensign A-to-B from the 'redshirts' seeing as Rick only has, what... 8 people?

After that, there is only the Governor, Milton, and stereotype "Rodriguez" military guy as named characters from Woodbury, other than those Johnny-come-lately black guy and woman.

My predictions:

Hershel's other daughter.

The baby (who we never see, eh?)

The Governor (and Woodbury stands, with Milton taking over)

Rodriguez

Hershel (with Glenn taking over as Rick's Conscience)

All of Tyrese's crew (but not Tyrese)

And one surprise -- either Andrea (whose character has deviated so far from what she was in the comics, I've come to think she's being lined up for disaster, and Maggie has sort of stepped in to cover the bad-ass Andrea role from the comics) or Daryl (now driven mad by Merle's death, absent from the comics, and replaced in the strong-arm-straight-talker role by Tyrese)

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on March 30, 2013, 12:46:51 PM
I think they'll be wanting to keep their Hillbilly quota though... and I'm kinda hoping Carl gets a shotgun round to his face.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 30, 2013, 03:50:34 PM
I think they'll be wanting to keep their Hillbilly quota though... and I'm kinda hoping Carl gets a shotgun round to his face.

Fucking Carl gets half his head blown off (literally) in the comics and STILL survives and acts like the Carl we have on the show.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 01, 2013, 12:53:46 AM
Finale -- cold open first impressions!

(1) Did I miss, like, three episodes?

(2) Did they hire random writers who had not watched the previous 15 episodes to write this?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 01, 2013, 01:28:23 AM
Well...that was interesting.

So. When't the Walking Dead finale?

Oh? What? That's what I just watched? But I just watched a piece of shit that made no sense at all and I had to fast forward through parts.

I mean...this really was just like *words* Like it was made by people who can't speak English.   
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on April 01, 2013, 10:21:09 AM
The entire interwebs seems angry this morning.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 01, 2013, 10:48:23 AM
The entire interwebs seems angry this morning.

It was a horrible, disjointed mess with no resolution. The bad guy just drives away? The entire town of Woodbury moves from the heavily fortified and supplied town (empty-handed!) to live in the blown out and ruined prison? There was, like, no logic applied to any part of the episode at all.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 01, 2013, 01:06:21 PM
The entire interwebs seems angry this morning.

It was a horrible, disjointed mess with no resolution. The bad guy just drives away? The entire town of Woodbury moves from the heavily fortified and supplied town (empty-handed!) to live in the blown out and ruined prison? There was, like, no logic applied to any part of the episode at all.

Vulture's recap is hilarious:

http://www.vulture.com/2013/04/walking-dead-recap-season-3-finale.html
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on April 02, 2013, 08:23:04 PM
The 'finale' made very little sense at all. Whenever the 'trap' at the prison was finally sprung, the Asian kid and his she-slut suddenly lost all those months of shooting practice missing groups of people out in the open for fuck's sake.

Once the Governor goes all Gestapo on his dissenters, during which I'm wondering why that pussy Rodriguez didn't gun him down, and drives off into the sunset with his United Colours of Benetton crew, we're left wondering why in the fuck did the Governor do that and to where is he driving with his hoes?

At least we're rid of Andrea. And Carl's behaviour is understandable figuring he's had a back-to-life father, his mother was whoring it around with his thought-to-be-dead dad's best friend... helped his mother birth and seen her gaping, bleeding vagina... killed his slut-mother... etc. etc.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on May 05, 2013, 12:41:06 PM
Man...I wish this show had dialogue as good as what Bad Lip Reading did...


Not a valid youtube URL
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on May 05, 2013, 10:57:16 PM
I enjoyed.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 20, 2013, 10:22:31 AM
Season 4 trailer... They'll renew it for a 5th season based solely on this!


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 18, 2013, 01:42:33 PM
So...we're getting a second show set in the universe. Hopefully the guy from Cold Storage, because those webisodes were the only good thing to come out of season two...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 01, 2013, 08:43:16 AM
Countdown to secret guilty addiction premiere!

This season: Everyone sits in the prison and does nothing! All action scenes have been played over and over again in the endless stream of 5 minute trailers we've been getting for the last 4 months.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 14, 2013, 05:31:29 PM
Season 4 had a good, strong start. Plus, it literally rained zombies!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 14, 2013, 05:33:31 PM
Ah... dropbox me!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 16, 2013, 01:42:48 PM
Oh my god...


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 23, 2013, 06:31:02 PM
Man...this is going to be an awesome season.

So, they're all going to get the flu and sit around being sick for 10 episodes. Calling it now. Oh, and, one of the Woodbury people will turn out to be a serial killer. Oh, and, someone's a spy for the Governor, who's pulling the strings on the whole thing.

The one good thing is that they've upped the zombie threat/presence/slaughter, so that's fun. And with the Woodbury folks, they have, like, 30 or 40 Redshirts. Perfect! This means they can kill multiple people every single episode.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 28, 2013, 02:30:32 PM
Another good season so far. I like that they're all getting sick. And that the black people aren't dying as predictably (but that's probably because they got in trouble for that last season).
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 01, 2013, 09:57:08 AM
I'm going to be a cranky old man, aren't I?

http://www.bigissue.com/mix/news/3181/george-romero-interview-walking-dead-just-soap-opera-occasional-zombie (http://www.bigissue.com/mix/news/3181/george-romero-interview-walking-dead-just-soap-opera-occasional-zombie)

Quote
GEORGE A ROMERO INTERVIEW: “THE WALKING DEAD IS JUST A SOAP OPERA WITH AN OCCASIONAL ZOMBIE”

Horror legend George A Romero reveals that he turned the chance to work on smash hit series, The Walking Dead
 
George A Romero, the father of zombies and the man who transformed the horror film with Night of the Living Dead, has revealed that he turned down the opportunity to work on the massive US television show, The Walking Dead.

The hit series made history on its return recently when it attracted the highest ever audience for a Cable series, and maintained the relentless march of the zombies, coming on the back of World War Z – Brad Pitt’s top-grossing film. But horror supremo Romero isn’t convinced.

“They asked me to do a couple of episodes of The Walking Dead but I didn’t want to be a part of it,” Romero told The Big Issue. “Basically it’s just a soap opera with a zombie occasionally. I always used the zombie as a character for satire or a political criticism and I find that missing in what’s happening now.”

The zombie flick has changed considerably since Romero brought Dawn of the Dead to life in 1968, most notably in their penchant for chasing down their victims at pace. Should zombies be able to run?

“I guess Zack Snyder started that with the remake of Dawn of the Dead – fast-moving zombies, but the zombies in World War Z, my God, they’re like army ants! But in all the adverts here they never called it a zombie film,” Romero said. Indeed, the man himself never actually called his Night of the Living Dead ‘zombies’.

“No, never did. I never thought they were zombies,” he explained. “To me back then, zombies were those voodoo guys who were given some sort of blowfish cocktail and became slaves.

“And they weren’t dead so I thought I was doing a brand new thing by raising the dead. Not that the dead haven’t been risen before… It goes back to Jesus, doesn’t it?”
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 01, 2013, 10:37:19 AM
Poor Romero.

And Big Issue needs better editors.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 01, 2013, 10:49:41 AM
At least TWD folks offered him a gig.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 02, 2013, 05:09:27 PM
Man...Romero...

So I'm at the dentist today and I see that the cover of Rolling Stone  is all Walking Dead. I pick it, read it, and the whole article is about how Walking Dead is the spiritual successor to Romero. The "slow zombies as a mirror to our own shortcomings" thing. It's lovingly analyzed, and Rolling Stone draws shocking parallels to Night, Dawn, and Day of the Dead. In fact, once you read it, you go, oh, yeah...this is what happened to the survivors of Dawn of the Dead. This is exactly Day of the Dead. Like, scene for scene.

Maybe that's why Romero went sour grapes? Weird, though, because doing a few episodes of Walking Dead would have brought him back to the mainstream. It would have made him a god again. The show is a big, fat homage to his work...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on November 02, 2013, 08:40:10 PM
Nice. I'll keep an eye out for that Rolling Stone issue.

I think Romero feels as an elder statesmen of independent movies that he's earned the right to not to zombie shit.  But yeah, most of it is probably pride... which is probably stupid. All that said, I'm sooooo over zombies which is the main reason I haven't watched TWD. Nothing I've seen tells me I'm getting anything I've haven't seen before. Though maybe that's the point? Night, Dawn, and Day are antiques now. Half of the TWD audience probably hasn't seen them.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 03, 2013, 11:18:44 AM
TWD isn't really worth getting into. It's just so terrible...and yet it's the sort of show you can't stop watching once you start.

Now Dracula and the current season of American Horror Story? Yes. Get those in you...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 04, 2013, 01:44:53 PM
Strong, strong season... It's like they've learned all of the lessons from the last three seasons... We're getting more zombies, scarier zombies, body counts that make sense, and it's not a sitzkrieg. We have a gang out looking for medicine, we have Rick and Carol on a food run (really a ruse for Rick to make a hard decision). Seeing the post-apocalypse world is what I want! Not 12 episodes stuck in a farmhouse, or a prison..

It also feels like there's a bit more on the line... And we've barely scene Lori-ghost at all!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 04, 2013, 02:04:33 PM
Excellent... I shall catch up with that this week.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 16, 2013, 02:47:08 PM
I've always wanted the zombie flick or show where the survivors make it their mission to exterminate the zombies. Finally we have the math on how many you'll need to kill a day to achieve that goal:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/heres-why-the-walking-dead-doesnt-make-any-damn-sense
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Reginald McGraw on November 17, 2013, 09:17:55 PM
Have the answered the question about what gives the zombies energy?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 18, 2013, 07:41:59 AM
Have the answered the question about what gives the zombies energy?

The devil gives them energy. Or Redbull.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 18, 2013, 10:17:22 AM
Have the answered the question about what gives the zombies energy?

The first season finale did, yes. They basically come back to life -- literally -- but all of the higher functions of their brain are dead. So it's all animal instinct. The body is still behaving normally -- blood, digestion, etc. Which doesn't explain how they survive extreme physical trauma like losing half their body.

They're also eating animals...which, then, doesn't explain how trapped zombies survive. Though trapped zombies do seem to like sleeping.

In re to last night's episode -- what the fuck was that? Five great episodes of the plague, and the breakdown of the community, and actual good Walking Dead...and then we get the Governor's story? And he's a moody bitch trapped with people who could not have survived a year. Seriously -- those people didn't know to shoot zombies in the head. After a year! And they weren't surrounded or noticed despite always having candlelight glaring at their windows, and a girl who stands out in the open.

And are we supposed to feel bad for the Governor or something? When last we saw him he executed all his people SS style! Now he's the sad, pitiful monster who loves children?

Terrible episode. Dumb, dumb, dumb... And more of him next week! What, are Rick & Co. taking the rest of the season off? SHOW IS ABOUT RICK & CO. IDIOTS!!!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 18, 2013, 11:07:34 AM
Nice...

http://io9.com/the-governor-returns-in-the-first-crappy-walking-dead-o-1466615906
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: Reginald McGraw on November 18, 2013, 05:45:11 PM
Have the answered the question about what gives the zombies energy?

The first season finale did, yes. They basically come back to life -- literally -- but all of the higher functions of their brain are dead. So it's all animal instinct. The body is still behaving normally -- blood, digestion, etc. Which doesn't explain how they survive extreme physical trauma like losing half their body.

They're also eating animals...which, then, doesn't explain how trapped zombies survive. Though trapped zombies do seem to like sleeping.

Yeah...if eating animals is what allows them to survive, I would think the city zombies should have died out quickly of starvation. Whereas the cattle ranch zombies would have lasted until the cattle died of starvation/being eaten. I still maintain that the best solution in a zombie attack is to hole up and wait it out. If they don't have the ability to use technology...things won't last long.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 18, 2013, 05:49:21 PM
Unless the zombies eat each other... then we'd have a zombie king.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 18, 2013, 06:15:10 PM
Have the answered the question about what gives the zombies energy?

The first season finale did, yes. They basically come back to life -- literally -- but all of the higher functions of their brain are dead. So it's all animal instinct. The body is still behaving normally -- blood, digestion, etc. Which doesn't explain how they survive extreme physical trauma like losing half their body.

They're also eating animals...which, then, doesn't explain how trapped zombies survive. Though trapped zombies do seem to like sleeping.

Yeah...if eating animals is what allows them to survive, I would think the city zombies should have died out quickly of starvation. Whereas the cattle ranch zombies would have lasted until the cattle died of starvation/being eaten. I still maintain that the best solution in a zombie attack is to hole up and wait it out. If they don't have the ability to use technology...things won't last long.

Now, for the record, the zombies are getting more rotten this season...and the WD people are all quick to point that out. (And, so far, it hasn't been 100% true.)

The whole concept really does fall apart when you think about the zombie apocalypse over a period of years. I have the same issue with Day of the Dead and current zombie apocalypse fiction. Because, yes, you're right. Quickly gather supplies, hole up, and let rot/winter/animals take care of them.

Because there's also that issue. Imagine the rise in animal populations. All those household pets going wild. A group of zombies wouldn't have any hope against a pack of feral dogs. If even one zookeeper let one large cat or wolf go, that thing would become king and just chomp down on everybody. Zombie's not going to run. The only weapon it has is normal human teeth and fingers.

Meanwhile, there's groups like the one I would run where we spend all day in snow plows with silenced gun crews in the beds of the trucks exterminating everything that moves.

I, personally, think the zombie apocalypse would be pretty fun (if I survived the initial outbreak). Kill Team Six! Your quota today is 10,000 dead zombies!

(The TV show is on Day 554 since the outbreak (approximately). The comics appear to be anywhere from 60-150 days since the outbreak.)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 18, 2013, 06:23:13 PM
By the way, we should note that Rick was abandoned for 42 DAYS -- not a typo -- while in a coma. No medical care, no food, no power to the hospital, no liquids. That's according to the official timeline for the show. Even if you dismiss that, the flowers beside his bed were obviously several weeks old.

He had a full IV when Shane left him. So figure that lasted, what, a day or two on a slow drip? Which means Rick was without food or water for 40 days and, seemingly, had no adverse effects except to be groggy.

Just want to put that out there as, perhaps, more ridiculous than zombies ticking along just fine in a locked room for 2 years.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 25, 2013, 06:56:29 PM
*wonders why he's watching this show*

*plans to go home and re-watch last night's episode for no particular reason at all*

Definition of madness?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 02, 2013, 08:04:46 PM
So the mid-season finale was The Walking Dead's Red Wedding episode. Jesus...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on January 04, 2014, 05:47:27 PM
Finally working through season 4 of Wanking Dead.

Glad the guv'nor is back.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on January 05, 2014, 07:04:23 PM
Our house sitter got me season one on DVD for X-Mas. Missus RC refuses to watch it with me, and I'm afraid if I watch the first three episodes again, I'll throw it out the window. Should I just start with episode 4 or ignore it completely?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 05, 2014, 07:38:16 PM
Our house sitter got me season one on DVD for X-Mas. Missus RC refuses to watch it with me, and I'm afraid if I watch the first three episodes again, I'll throw it out the window. Should I just start with episode 4 or ignore it completely?

The first three episodes are the best episodes of the whole series!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on January 06, 2014, 06:39:57 AM
Our house sitter got me season one on DVD for X-Mas. Missus RC refuses to watch it with me, and I'm afraid if I watch the first three episodes again, I'll throw it out the window. Should I just start with episode 4 or ignore it completely?

The first three episodes are the best episodes of the whole series!

And the first half of season 3.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 06, 2014, 08:09:47 AM
Our house sitter got me season one on DVD for X-Mas. Missus RC refuses to watch it with me, and I'm afraid if I watch the first three episodes again, I'll throw it out the window. Should I just start with episode 4 or ignore it completely?

The first three episodes are the best episodes of the whole series!

And the first half of season 3.

Yeah, but getting to season 3 is a journey through television vomit.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on January 06, 2014, 08:59:58 AM
I only watched 4 episodes of Season 2... In fact, you can skip most of season 2.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 06, 2014, 10:32:19 AM
It is possible to just start the series with season 3, yes.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 06, 2014, 11:44:00 AM
It might even be possible to start with season 4.2!

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on January 17, 2014, 10:36:05 PM
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 23, 2014, 08:37:30 AM
I like how Norman isn't really all that unsettled. Actually, I kind of expected him to fight back...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on January 23, 2014, 08:48:46 AM
If I saw that thing crawling towards me in a supermarket I'd kick off it's head. Then *I'd* be the bad guy down at the 'station.'
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 04, 2014, 12:47:45 PM
Okay, so, the fans loved the Governor so much that they brought him back. Then they killed him brutally. Now...the fans still love him so much that they're bringing him back again. This time as a ghost, apparently (taking the place of Lori from Rick's post-prison meltdown delusions in the comics, no doubt). 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 10, 2014, 09:52:36 AM
It's the Carl and Michonne show! Next week is the Daryl & All The Redshirts show! Splitting them up might be kind of fun, actually.

The Governor is still in the credits. We got a corpse shot -- non zombie, and head-shot -- but no other sign of him. So he has to be a ghost. Or flashbacks. Or maybe he has an evil(er) twin! Because this show is just stupid enough to do that...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on February 10, 2014, 11:53:48 AM
Ah! It's back on TV.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 10, 2014, 12:07:40 PM
Ah! It's back on TV.

4.2! Which looks like it is going to be spent doing the split storylines. If we stick with the comics, we end this season on the interstate heading north to DC...and we meet our first "herd," which is one of the few cool moments. Though we've already had a couple of "herd" scenes, so who knows. And the show is slowly (painfully, inch by inch) divorcing itself from the comics.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 10, 2014, 08:09:21 PM
LOL...the title of io9's review of this last episode is hilarious:

Quote
The Walking Dead's Carl is so bad at the zombie apocalypse, you guys
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 16, 2014, 11:29:12 PM
The Daryl & The Redshirts show was almost as annoying as the Carl is Bad at The Apocalypse Show!

Though it does, again, prove that the only one who is not bad at the apocalypse is Glenn. 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 24, 2014, 10:35:32 AM
Last night was the comedy episode, I guess. Rick under the bed and getting his head bumped multiple times.... Eugene machine-gunning the truck (he's survived the zombie apocalypse for a year and he can't use a gun?),  Glenn's insane insistence to go after Maggie when they're 400 miles away from the prison, Abraham's insistence that they have to stick together to "save the world," Carl and Michonne's Cheez Whiz adventure...

Next week we're back to Daryl & The Redshirts which, amusingly, based on the previews, is the same tone as the last episode with them -- that is, Daryl is hardly in it and the whole episode is narrated by a teenage girl.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 10, 2014, 01:37:22 PM
Only three episodes to go and we're still moving pretty strong! The secret to this season is that everybody's been scattered into the wilderness, on the run, wounded, and it's played out like season fucking one should have been. There's this desperate, hopeless loneliness in each episode...and you just aren't sure who's going to make it (except for the usual fan favorites). So I've been sitting here all season waiting for one of these red shirts to get eaten... And I know it's going to happen. And instead of serving that up in the usual write-by-numbers way, they've forced us to get involved with the red shirts as they wander aimlessly.

As of last night's episode, everybody but Beth and Daryl (whose lives just got fucked) knows about Terminus and have decided to head in that direction.

What I find thrilling is that we are now completely out of the comics universe. Terminus (which got a brief name-check in a garbled radio blast last season) is solely in the TV universe. That's good, because the comics become especially stupid at this point.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 17, 2014, 10:27:54 AM
Jesus... Only this show can get away with kids killing kids and the on-screen execution of a 12 year old girl.

Last night's episode was pretty fucked up. Probably one of the more fucked up hours of TV I've seen... And we answer some lingering questions, and reset Carol's character for the eventual reunion at Terminus. Sort of.

But, god... Just uncomfortable, all around.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 20, 2014, 05:19:13 PM
Quote
The Walking Dead is one of the hottest shows on TV, so it's no wonder why a major broadcast network would want to air it in syndication. But broadcast networks have standards, and TWD's massive amounts of blood and violence aren't allowed. MyNetworkTV's solution? Edit the hell out of it.
According to Entertainment Weekly, the Fox-owned, national channel will somehow turn the show all about people being eaten by zombies and occasionally murdered by other people into "family friendly" entertainment.

The article goes on using the latest episode as an example and suggests that "maybe Micah and Lizzie will just 'run away' during a commercial break!"
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 24, 2014, 09:45:19 AM
Man...the back half of this season has gotten so amazing.

Last night was the penultimate episode. We're all slowly coming together as folks head to Terminus -- some of whom have already arrived, and I got a creepy vibe just in those last few seconds. Cannibals. Clearly.

Everyone (who's still alive -- including the great Lennie James) shows up for the finale. Is crazy Lennie James in charge of Terminus? That'll be fun. More like he'll be their magical escape at the very end of the finale and we'll get left with a mega-cliffhanger for 6 months.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 24, 2014, 11:25:59 AM
So all the talk today in Blog-o-land is which main character will die at Terminus. Everyone's gotten foreshadowing at this point. We built up Beth (and my money is that she's cooking on the grill now), we've built up Team Glenn, Daryl's struggling with his identity, Team Rick is happy and laughing (doomed!).

Maggie burning her picture is the obvious foreshadowing, so I say she's safe. Strangely, all the blog talk is that Rick may die. Which would be so insanely ballsy for this show... We'll be screaming about that for months.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 28, 2014, 11:32:00 AM
So...they haven't released the finale to media, the "sneak peeks" are all nothing, the "next week" trailer tells us...nothing.

Shit is going to be bonkers Sunday night... Prepare for internet meltdown on Monday.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on March 28, 2014, 01:59:07 PM
Quote
AMC Has Secretly Been Warning Us 'Breaking Bad' Is 'The Walking Dead' Prequel

http://www.hitfix.com/comedy/amc-has-secretly-been-warning-us-breaking-bad-is-the-walking-dead-prequel (http://www.hitfix.com/comedy/amc-has-secretly-been-warning-us-breaking-bad-is-the-walking-dead-prequel)

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 28, 2014, 02:18:43 PM
Silly.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 30, 2014, 03:38:13 PM
Finale country!

I just realized that Rick gets top billing and is the god-emperor of AMC and he's only had about 50 minutes of screentime this entire season. Now that's the way to work!

I'm re-watching the penultimate episode. Glenn is so bad at the apocalypse.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 30, 2014, 11:22:17 PM
Jesus...

Okay, fine. Thanks. Now I'll just sit here and wait 7 fucking months you fucking assholes.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 31, 2014, 08:10:10 AM
Whew, okay. Got over my shock at the cliffhanger. The finale is everything everyone predicted, and they tip their cards almost immediately. One thing I loved was how they rushed the story line all of a sudden. We've been marching through the woods for half a season, slowly getting to know the deeper side of all of our characters, moodily analyzing the more depressing aspects of the apocalypse, and, suddenly, in 42 minutes, everything comes wildly together. All possible conflict is resolved in the space of seconds, and then we hurry up and get to Terminus. Then the shit hits the fan and we're jolted into a wicked, nasty cliffhanger. T-minus 159 days...

So the pacing is off because they don't know how to write this show.

Obvious solutions from open storylines: Tyreese and Carol will save them.

I also think Beth is still in play... There was a spooky flashback moment that screamed "she's dead," but I think that was bad writing and she wasn't actually snatched by Terminus.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 31, 2014, 10:20:21 AM
The weirdest part was how Daryl's gang seemed completely unrelated to the guys we've been getting to know for three or so episodes. It's like they suddenly changed writers and didn't know what to do with them... Which immediately makes every post-Beth episode with those guys, and the whole encounter they had with Rick a while ago, utterly stupid and pointless. If they weren't planning on using those guys for anything, why bother having them? Let's create six new characters, give Daryl a little storyline, and then just ignore all of that for the sake of a dramatic idiot scene!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 31, 2014, 01:48:27 PM
io9 just gives up and goes for some dick-sucking:

Quote
And thus ends season 4, easily The Walking Dead's finest since it began. A season that turned the crappiness of season 3 into a strength, as Rick pulled back from the brink of madness and tried to forge a life for his family and his people. A season with actual drama and conflict, with sensible threats both external and internal. A season that turned the Governor into a credible threat. A season that separated the protagonists, had them wander about almost aimlessly, and gave us some of the best episodes in the show's run. A show that delivered some major shocks that felt wholly earned, but was still a show that, for the first time ever, had more to say than just what it put up on the screen.

Tor, however, is a bit more critical...


Quote
Half of me is relieved to reach the season finale, and the other half is sorry to see it all end. But that mentality accurately sums up my whole attitude toward the show as a whole. It’s satisfying and disappointing, entertaining and insipid, provocative and asinine. I’m flummoxed to think of another show this chaotic and uneven that somehow manages to add viewers in such unprecedented quantities. I’m curious to know how much of the audience is made up of viewers like me with a staunchly ambivalent opinion who keep watching anyway and those who love it without abatement. I suspect the former to be the larger group, but clearly there are enough of the latter to keep this train moving. And I think that’s a good thing. Mostly.

...

Instead, we get the Big Battle at the beginning, and everyone spending the next 30 minutes talking about how it makes them feel. It’s like explaining why a joke is funny: it helps make the joke makes sense, but it also ruins what makes it funny in the first place. We’re smart enough to understand the ramifications of Rick’s actions. It’s not that complicated a situation, nor is it a new one. We’ve been down this road before with Rick and the other adults—heck, that’s the whole point of those flashbacks to the early days at the prison. The show has stretched out the “Rick the Leader/Rick the Farmer” debate for two seasons too many, and, fortunately, it looks like they’ve finally settled on “Leader.”

...

I will never understand how this show can so routinely undercut a major storyline in favor of overstaying their welcome with a weaker one. 

...

 In fact, I’m choosing to think of this whole finale as the first episode of season 5. It works better as a premiere than a finale. Actually, surprisingly, it works pretty well altogether. It drags a bit in the middle, but so does the whole show, for that matter. And if there are two things TWD is killer at, it’s beginnings and cliffhanger endings.

...

It’s good to know that we have Hershel to blame for Farmer Rick. Now I feel less sorry about his death, because holy crap did that plotline suck.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on May 30, 2014, 01:43:33 PM
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on May 30, 2014, 02:49:13 PM
This gets us into a segue about how the Wil Wheaton Project is the most expensive effort ever to stop someone from being called Wesley.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 28, 2014, 01:18:02 PM
Season 5 trailer! Looks awesome. This totally spoils last season's finale, and who dies this season, and just about everything else... But it's TWD. No one cares, right? The show's really about outdoing the previous season's zombie make-up.


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 04, 2014, 11:33:19 AM
This is one of those threads that's fun to go through from the start... Talk about a wildly up and down show. I hate it, I love it, I hate it... One thing's for sure, I'm terribly addicted and I can't wait for it to return. I'm hoping that the brilliant groove they figured out last season will stay.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on September 04, 2014, 12:30:42 PM
Ah... wait. I forgot to finish season 4 after the needless break.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 04, 2014, 12:34:56 PM
The worst thing to ever happen in television is the "mid-season cliffhanger." Do people read half a book and then stop for six months? No. Do movies stop halfway through and then make you wait a year for the rest? No.

All the folks involved in Farscape blamed that show's cancellation entirely on the ridiculous mid-season breaks, one of which was a full 12 months.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on September 04, 2014, 12:36:39 PM
Walking Dead's about dwarves and pixies, right?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 06, 2014, 11:03:49 AM
And we're getting that spin-off....which is going to be the same type of show, except with a different group of people in a different part of the country.

Here's hoping we join back up with the survivors of the Cold Storage webisodes:

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on September 06, 2014, 11:07:09 AM
I hate all of their faces.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 11, 2014, 10:58:35 AM
Sexy...


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 23, 2014, 04:30:35 PM
Rumor is that three major title characters die violently and "shockingly" in the first few minutes of the premiere.

My money's on them getting rid of the baby. They've been endlessly teasing Glenn's death in every trailer except the latest below (he's dead in the comics). Beth we've all assumed is dead, so it wouldn't be "shocking" if that's revealed. Sasha's an obvious redshirt, so she could go. They spent so much time on Bob's story and redemption last season, so he's a good shocking death. Tara's a redshirt...

As I type all that out, I realize the subtle brilliance of season four -- they spent their time, safe and secure in the knowledge that half of the world was watching, to build up a bunch of the backstories for the redshirts. Hell, we had a long Rick-less sweep last season for them to do this. For the first time, the show had some deep characters walking around...and now every single one of them is in jeopardy.


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 26, 2014, 01:49:12 PM
Yay!


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 27, 2014, 12:34:02 PM
Yay again!

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on September 27, 2014, 12:54:25 PM
This show is still going?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 27, 2014, 03:56:31 PM
This show is still going?

Shockingly, this is the most watched show in America. It's been forever-renewed.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on September 27, 2014, 04:09:51 PM
This show is still going?

Shockingly, this is the most watched show in America. It's been forever-renewed.

Maybe I'll pick up in season 89.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 27, 2014, 04:45:29 PM
Season 4 was awesome. It's not the same show anymore. Season 4 is where they sort of realized "we're immortal and we can do anything!"
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 08, 2014, 08:41:39 PM
Man...watching an episode from season two. It's almost unrecognizable from what the show became in the 4th season. It's like a completely different show... Funny.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 14, 2014, 04:57:05 AM
Season 5 premiere was balls out awesome.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 15, 2014, 10:41:16 AM
Wow... So I didn't stay for the post-credits sequence for the premiere. Just rewatched it and...wow. Even more awesome.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 16, 2014, 11:11:09 AM
Because we need a time lapse of a German couple binge watching 51 episodes in a row.


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 16, 2014, 11:57:56 AM
I've caught up with the second half of season 4 and the season 5 premiere. I need more now.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 16, 2014, 12:04:50 PM
Me too! I love the new badass Carol. Remember how annoying she was for three goddamned seasons? Now I can't get enough of her.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 16, 2014, 12:52:33 PM
Me too! I love the new badass Carol. Remember how annoying she was for three goddamned seasons? Now I can't get enough of her.

And Carrrrrrrrrrrl is less of a faggot now. I did kinda hope Carl would get raped in that scene. That would've taught him good.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 16, 2014, 01:12:26 PM
Me too! I love the new badass Carol. Remember how annoying she was for three goddamned seasons? Now I can't get enough of her.

And Carrrrrrrrrrrl is less of a faggot now. I did kinda hope Carl would get raped in that scene. That would've taught him good.

So this sort of illustrates a concern that I have... In the almost-rape scene, you really didn't know which way it was going to break, did you? They could have fucked any one or all three of them up...and done something drastic.

I feel like the show lost that in the season five premiere. Our heroes are all unscathed, despite the fact that they're at the center of a warzone. This could be forgivable, except the pulling of punches was visible -- not only do we suddenly get a bunch of anonymous redshirts to take the hits, but Glenn's close call -- twice over! -- was kind of like, ah, okay...so now the show is afraid to kill the main characters because the actors are all so popular on Twitter during the hiatus.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 16, 2014, 01:48:25 PM
I hope season 5 brings much death.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 16, 2014, 04:42:41 PM
Cool...


http://www.blastr.com/2014-10-15/check-out-walking-dead-storyboards-set-huge-terminus-showdown
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 20, 2014, 08:13:46 AM
Oh, I see! It took them four seasons to learn that it's no fun to kill a major character suddenly. You have to do it slowly, painfully, and horribly over the course of several episodes.

Episode two holds up from the awesome premiere. It's the sort of set-piece episode for the rest of the season. We get one obvious surprise zombie attack, which is always wearisome. We get a little hint of Beth -- I'm waiting for her to be all calm and happy wherever she is. Oh, hey, guys...

The DC thing bugs me because Eugene can't explain himself beyond saying "you wouldn't understand," so you'd think at least Abraham would have some sort of layman's explanation.

But, oh well.



Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 22, 2014, 11:59:37 AM
Wow...so The Walking Dead has a larger audience than Sunday Night Football... Amazing.

Now that the show doesn't suck so much, that kind of excites me. We're going to have a long running post-apocalypse show! In fact, I think it's currently the longest running PA show...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on October 23, 2014, 09:25:58 AM
Wow...so The Walking Dead has a larger audience than Sunday Night Football... Amazing.

Now that the show doesn't suck so much, that kind of excites me. We're going to have a long running post-apocalypse show! In fact, I think it's currently the longest running PA show...

With recurring cannibalistic Apple store employees from Terminus.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 23, 2014, 10:23:22 AM
If we're going to spend all season watching Rick turn the tables on bad guys and hack them to pieces, I'd much rather they be heartless Apple Store employees than, say, the Governor's misguided army.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 27, 2014, 08:44:39 AM
Oh my god this season is awesome... Episode three was just as strong, just as cool, and almost mesmerizing.

I'm a little surprised at the conclusion, though. It was all, oh, well, so that storyline's over. On to the new Big Bad!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 03, 2014, 08:04:15 AM
The Beth Episode was weird. She's involved in some strange drama. Good thing the actress is so hot.

Beth Episode is also the start of full-on season four copy-catting! So we have Beth (and eventually Carol and Daryl) at Slabtown, Team Rick still at the church, and Team Abraham on the road. All eventually headed for DC.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 03, 2014, 11:15:04 AM
Episode 3 was fun... machete in the face, Apple workers!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 03, 2014, 11:19:12 AM
Episode 3 was fun... machete in the face, Apple workers!

So passes the Hungry, Hungry Hipsters...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 12, 2014, 04:30:32 PM
I want to see the hot Mexican soldier chick naked.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 12, 2014, 04:56:24 PM
I want to see the hot Mexican soldier chick naked.

A GIS for Christian Serratos is sideboob heaven.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on November 13, 2014, 07:48:08 AM
I want to see the hot Mexican soldier chick naked.

A GIS for Christian Serratos is sideboob heaven.

*Drool*
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 17, 2014, 10:30:05 AM
Oh, good. The Carol and Daryl Show. Pssst, AMC -- this should be your spin-off series!

One episode of just Carol and Daryl has more humanity, acting, and adventure than the last four seasons! They don't even need to be badasses -- and they weren't! It was mainly just a brooding episode, with a few bad-ass high points to keep us in the mood. I especially loved moving along the periphery of the pilot episode's sets. That was a rush.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 18, 2014, 07:29:34 PM
Rewatching the Daryl and Carol Power Hour. I think this is the gateway episode for this show... It's so sublime in places. So quiet... These two characters are no BS all the time. How bizarre that this show knows how to write for them.

(all impassive)

"You still haven't asked me what happened. With the girls."

"I know what happened." (long beat) "They ain't here."

"It was worse than that."

(eye acting/no response)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 24, 2014, 08:25:21 AM
Uh-oh... A slow-down episode. Now, with a normal show, that's fine. With TWD, it just reminds you how dumb this show is.

But it looks like they're just giving us a break before they do some sort of insane mid-season finale.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 05, 2014, 10:13:09 PM
Mid-season finale made me mad.

The big shocker twist end, though, is a prime example of why trigger discipline is important (and always the first thing I note when watching TV or movies).
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 06, 2014, 11:20:59 AM
Mid-season finale made me mad.

The big shocker twist end, though, is a prime example of why trigger discipline is important (and always the first thing I note when watching TV or movies).

Ha! I agree with all the reviews: There's no way we can feel like there's a conflict when the bad guys are a handful of cops with pistols who have been hunkered down since the apocalypse vs. our cast of super-killers who could each, down to the children, single-handedly defeat a Terminator.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 09, 2014, 11:34:04 AM
Catching up on the mid-season finale backlash... And I agree, because, come on. The surprise death of the character we've all kind of fallen for was sloppy and unsatisfying. There's a right way and a wrong way to kill a major character.

But, then, this also spirals into a discussion about the meaninglessness of life... The cheapness of it. The more I detest the mid-season finale the more I think maybe that was the point. We've gotten comfortable with our team of super-killers. The first half of the season has made a point -- over and over again -- to note that "if you survived this long then you can survive anything."

But...that's not really true, is it?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 17, 2014, 12:05:39 PM
Two news nuggets:

The spinoff will be set in LA.  snorebot!




The spinoff will take place during the early days of the epidemic. Which is awesome.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 12, 2015, 04:08:35 PM
LOL, Walking Dead... If they keep up the "bigger than football" ratings, the season six trailer will just be the president of AMC lazily saying, "Show comes back in a month, check it out."

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 12, 2015, 04:15:56 PM
So let's analyze the throwaway trailer:

1) It's winter! The show has only had a five second scene set in the winter. This is a huge change.

2) Where's Carl?!?!

3) Time has passed. Carol's fully healed. So are we getting a jump and not picking up where the mid-season finale left us? Looks like.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 15, 2015, 11:08:46 AM
So...when the Walking Dead starts filming in DC the season after this next one, we should all probably move to somewhere far away because we'll never have an easy commute again.

Quote
Ross Marquand will join the cast in the second half of season 5 as a "yet to be announced" character. Of course, with the comics as a guide, the best guess has him pinned for the role of Aaron, who meets the group on the way to Washington D.C. and recruits them into the walled-off community known as the Alexandria Safe-Zone. Further hints that Marquand will play Aaron came in an episode of Talking Dead where Robert Kirkman said that "a very prominent gay character from the comics" would be appearing soon on the show.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on January 15, 2015, 06:53:22 PM
I should figure out how to get on that.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: monkey! on January 16, 2015, 06:17:06 AM
This show is still on...?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 16, 2015, 08:49:51 AM
This show is still on...?

And the biggest thing ever.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 20, 2015, 03:49:09 PM
Okay, that's better...


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 24, 2015, 10:42:28 AM
Quote
When The Walking Dead spin-off series was announced, the producers were adamant that it would feature all new survivors in a new situation, namely the earliest days of the zombie apocalypse. Apparently now they've realized it might be somewhat helpful to have a more direct tie-in between the old show and the new.

This is probably why The Nerdist is reporting that one of the characters from the prequel will be part of a six-episode arc in the sixth season of The Walking Dead. It'll obviously be the character's future, so viewers will know that he won't be dying in the prequel series, but maybe it'll convince those people who love The Walking Dead but maybe aren't sure they want more Walking Dead that they should check out the spin-off.

By the way, The Nerdist also reports that the series will be titled Fear the Walking Dead, which... which is... well, it's pretty terrible. Seems like The Rising Dead would be a much better choice. AMC, if you want to use that, just email em andI'll tell you where to mail the check.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 04, 2015, 12:26:28 PM
I'm ignoring the "first two minutes" footage. Very excited for the return... Though it's taken me till just this week to recover from the shit they pulled with Beth.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 08, 2015, 11:57:49 PM
Previously on...The Walking Dead... We totally fucked you over and we don't care. In fact, here's a pre-credits montage that will make you start screaming and pacing around the room.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 09, 2015, 12:28:47 AM
Holy shit this episode...

This show just figured out that it can do anything it wants.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 16, 2015, 11:40:38 AM
So much for your resume, RC. TWD's "Alexandria Safe Zone" is being filmed at a small town in Georgia made to look like NOVA.

And last night introduced Aaron! So next season in the Safe Zone for sure.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on February 17, 2015, 11:11:45 AM
VA has some of the worst film tax incentives into country while Georgia has some of the best.

That's also why House of Cards is shot n Baltimore and not DC.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 17, 2015, 02:31:50 PM
VA has some of the worst film tax incentives into country while Georgia has some of the best.

That's also why House of Cards is shot n Baltimore and not DC.

That's enormously short-sighted of them...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on February 17, 2015, 06:39:48 PM
It's a financial decision. They go where it's cheaper.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 18, 2015, 07:10:15 AM
Well, of course. I mean short sighted on the part of Virginia.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on February 18, 2015, 09:29:35 AM
I could really go off on a rant here, but yeah, Virginia is pretty stupid about it. I think part of it is pure ego. They feel like they're unique in certain, let's say, Civil War style landscapes and can charge top dollar for it.

The other part of it is that whole conservative old money commonwealth thing where "We got a long just fine on tobacco since my grandfather's grandfather's was a boy. Them fancy motion picture machines will never make any money, at least not as much as old tabaccy. Marion, could you have the other servants bring lemonade and rhubarb pie onto the veranda? It's hotter than the devil, I do declare!"
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 02, 2015, 10:06:25 AM
How did this show become so compelling? I was worried that the Alexandria Safe Zone would instantly bring us into a prison-style slow-down and decay mode, but it hasn't. There's enough tension and mystery to make it interesting, and the latest episode builds on something we've sort of been seeing since Terminus -- Team Rick are the villains. Or, at least, have that potential.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 09, 2015, 08:43:45 AM
Three episodes left! Which means they'll have to stop the moody PTSD analysis sessions and get back to blowing away zombies.

The W's (probably a souped-up version of The Whisperers from the comics) are interesting...though it's strange that Rick is yet to draw the parallel between the W zombies and the previous gated community (so much like the Safe Zone) that was destroyed by them. Rick has shared all the same chilling clues as the audience.

But, oh well. Maybe now that he's shaved his beard he's gone back to early seasons Rick.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 09, 2015, 05:18:12 PM
The Walking Dead spinoff got the greenlight for two full seasons...even though it still doesn't have a title. It starts this summer.

On one hand, I worry that this franchise has the capability to exhaust itself very quickly... We all still secretly hate TWD, even though the last couple seasons have been brilliant. The Safe Zone sort of reminds os of why the last two seasons were brilliant -- they were on the run. When they shave, wash, and have time to have emotional breakdowns...we just don't care.

On the other hand, I'm eager to see the world as it turned. We got little glimpses in flashbacks to the apocalypse early on in TWD (arguably the only good moments of the first two seasons), and they really rocked my boxers, if you know what I mean.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 16, 2015, 08:28:40 AM
Man, I was worried about another sitzkrieg at the Safe Zone... But we just got another major character's death (that makes three this season!), and they are going with the "Rick & Co. are the true villains" storyline.

Also confirming that they should have killed Father Gabriel a long time ago.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 23, 2015, 10:18:41 AM
So they decided to pull their punches on the whole "are our heroes really the villains thing."

First, they take away the creepy Rick angle. He's been all obsessed with this girl and we've been waiting for Rick to simply take what he wants, because that's how he was acting, and then suddenly they go down the "she's a battered wife and you have to save her" road. Blah.

But then Rick tries to save her, and the whole community shows up to watch their fight, and he flips out and delivers a blood-soaked, crazy monologue about how the Safe Zone isn't really safe and everyone is deluding themselves and trouble's coming (which we know, because we've been reminded every episode this season of the mysterious W's). So Rick's crew joins the other Safe Zoners in looking shocked and appalled at his outburst until, finally, Michonne knocks him out and he's taken prisoner. Previews for the 90 finale are all about the Trial of Rick!

So...wait a minute, writers! Everyone's been egging Rick on for the last four episodes to step up and do and say exactly what he did. But then, in this episode, they react with shock to the same words they've been whispering in Rick's ear? Oh, but that's okay, because half of Team Rick did a full 180 in this episode and told him that the Safe Zone is safe and they have to try and make it work and Rick needs to cool down (despite the fact that he was cool before the same people told him they aren't safe and he needs to do something).

They've been overplaying the PTSD thing...and pausing mid-action to discuss how they're changing for the better in the Safe Zone and how "behind those walls, civilization exists!"

This is very strange talk for a group of people who once established their own civilization behind walls and had those walls smashed in by a madman with a tank... And who saw evidence that the same thing had happened to Noah's walled community just down the road from the Safe Zone...and who knew what existed behind the walls of Terminus and Woodbury and narrowly escaped both times... Very strange talk for folks who have SEEN the W's herding their trained zombies to attack the Safe Zone's walls.

Do they think there are no more madmen with tanks? Do they think their completely undefended sheet metal walls are going to work? No...because they've all been saying they won't for three episodes while Rick wandered around smiling at the trees.

Maybe the writers for last night's episode hadn't ever watched the show before.

The worst part is that the resolution is so obvious. So now everyone has inexplicably turned on Rick for criticizing the community. The W's will arrive in force and the walls will go down and half the red shirts will get eaten and the season will end with everyone saying, gosh, Rick, you were right, so now you're our god king.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 23, 2015, 02:18:50 PM
So Norman Reedus says that the finale will "make you cry" and "piss you off" and he's on the couch in Talking Dead.

Which means the show is going to kill its most popular character!

(Carol is also on the couch...)

There's this part of me that's wondering if they're just going to kill everyone and reboot with Rick outside and alone.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 30, 2015, 04:15:11 PM
Wow... So the Walking Dead finale was calm, even-handed, and well thought out. It was 90 minutes of story...only two red shirt deaths, and just about every cast member got to experience a big change -- but it was a drift towards civilization, away from the savagery of the last two seasons. It was an episode all about forgiveness, finding strength, rediscovering faith...

Really very subtle and very good.

We still don't have a full picture of the Wolves...though they're obviously a well-organized cult, and now they're gunning for Team Rick.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 01, 2015, 04:44:48 PM
Spin-off trailer.



 snorebot!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 02, 2015, 12:52:14 PM
Season six is already being talked about... Morgan's a goody two-shoes and now hates Evil Rick, the Wolves are going to be the Big Bad, and the season will be "bigger and louder than ever before."

But, first, we must all survive "Fear the Walking Dead" this summer.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 15, 2015, 02:30:49 PM
Setting my mind (somewhat) at ease, the showrunners say that fear the Walking Dead will not be an origin story. It's going to take place more recently after the outbreak than season one of TWD proper, but it won't answer any questions. It'll just be another group of survivors on the run. i.e., it'll be a reboot of TWD proper.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on May 12, 2015, 10:55:54 AM
AMC remains tight-lipped... But their first "behind the scenes" video reveals that the group of survivors are all co-workers at a school. So we're losing the "stranger" aspect... Probably because, as we saw on the parent show, the writers don't know how to write about strangers getting to know each other.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on May 20, 2015, 04:31:27 PM
Fear the Walking Dead (you know, the show that doesn't exist yet) got renewed for a second season.

AMC is drunk on power.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on June 20, 2015, 11:46:40 AM
Haha! What the fuck? Here's the first trailer for the spinoff:


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on June 21, 2015, 10:32:39 AM
That looks like a meth-head running from the cops.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on June 22, 2015, 11:59:12 AM
That looks like a meth-head running from the cops.

I love that we're still not quite clear on what the show's about. A bunch of people trapped in a school in LA during the initial outbreak.

Trailer: Androgynous guy in a woman's sweater running.

Subtitle: Fuck you, it's more Walking Dead, you'll watch it because you're all retards. We're not even going to try this time around.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on June 25, 2015, 04:00:56 PM
 snorebot!


Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 09, 2015, 12:16:52 PM
We're finally seeing zombies in the endless fucking barrage of Fear the Walking Dead teasers.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 12, 2015, 12:25:20 PM
Season six trailer! It looks amazing.


And, finally, after (I'm not kidding) 20 teasers, we get a proper Fear the Walking Dead trailer. Which...does not look amazing.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on July 30, 2015, 04:27:09 PM
Quote
“I think more than anything else, ‘Fear the Walking Dead’ will get to show people coming to grips with society crumbling around them in a way we mostly skipped over on ‘The Walking Dead,’” said Robert Kirkman, a creator of both shows and “The Walking Dead” comic-book series.

He's forgotten that we spent the entire first season with characters crying about the loss of their Maytag washing machines.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 03, 2015, 09:00:37 AM
The first good Fear the Walking Dead trailer. This is what the audience wants, not endless teasers with annoying characters being annoying. The whole pitch for this show is "it's set when the zombie apocalypse starts," so, yes, just do trailers like this, retards.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on August 03, 2015, 03:43:14 PM
That's a pretty amazing trailer.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 17, 2015, 04:41:11 PM
Fear the Walking Dead premieres on Sunday and I'm actually really looking forward to it... Which is weird. There's no reason I should be all about this horrible franchise. The only possible explanation is that there's some sort of They Live-level of subliminal advertising going on.

"Watch"   "Obey"   "Watch TWD"  "You'll get used to Rick's bad accent"  "That death last season totally made sense and you know it"   "Obey" "Watch watch"
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 24, 2015, 09:55:51 AM
Wow...Fear the Walking Dead is the prologue we didn't want.

The entire pilot had two zombies and social media footage of another (the ubiquitous modern zombie movie scene where a zombie wreaks havoc on paramedics). Otherwise, it was all about setting up the 110% certified unlikable characters. We feel nothing for them, the relationships are weird, and we don't really care...or want to care. We're here for the zombie apocalypse but, at this pace, it'll take all season for it to really heat up. Blah.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 31, 2015, 04:56:21 PM
Episode two of Fear makes up for that abysmal and lackluster pilot. Mainly because we go ahead and cut to the chase -- civilization is collapsing, and we end the episode with everything on the brink. People are getting attacked, the CDC is on the move, no one needs to spend 5 minute talky scenes trying to convince another person that they should get out of the city because shit is getting bad.  Powers going out, looters are on the move... And we get our first up close and personal walker and walker-kill.

That said, the cast is still totally unlikable. I found myself pining to follow the story of the fat pimply kid who was loading up on supplies and left our annoying cast to go on his own bugout plan, obviously in a far better TV show about the zombie apocalypse.

There are also really bizarre things that make me wonder if a computer wrote the script. For example -- girl in a darkened house is shining her flashlight at the window to look out at the chaos and destruction. So, firstly, WTF? Secondly, does no one in the writing room know how light or windows work?

The annoying guy whom I thought was our narrative center spent the whole episode puking and, instead, the annoying guidance counselor became our center. This didn't seem intentional... The writers just have no idea what to do with the ensemble now that they have them. I get the feeling that the story of the apocalypse is so big and fun for them that they're not bothering with our core group of survivors... Which is a huge mistake because we're on episode two and the shit has hit the fan. By the end of the season, this core group of survivors will be all we have left to watch.

The problem with this show (which the main show doesn't have to worry about) is the familiar problem with zombie movies/shows -- they're set in a world that lacks 100% of zombie movie culture. So people aren't alarmed by what's obviously a zombie bearing down on them. Even when things that are obviously zombies are being cleaned up by the CDC and being shot 50 times people think they're "some poor homeless man on drugs."

At this point -- 50+ years deep into zombie culture -- that's really tiresome.

Now RC will say "What's the way around that?" I think it's easy -- you cast the adults as rational idiots and you leave it to the children. For example, pimples saw the writing on the wall and was bugging out. He even had a brief, shining moment where he gives our lead an abridged version of the "how easy it is for society" to collapse speech from Survivors. He acknowledges that there is a threat out there -- though he portrays the zombies as people infected by a disease a la 28 Days Later. So why not him make the leap and say "It's the zombie apocalypse"?





Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 14, 2015, 09:01:37 AM
Okay, fine, yes, all of America is watching Fear just so they can see the previews for the parent show. I admit it!

Though I am glad to see the slow encroaching apocalypse. It's kind of fun if it wasn't intercut with long scenes of people playing Monopoly and talking about the apocalypse whilst reacting laconically to horror movie noises.

The following is not an exaggeration:

Scary/Zombie noise whilst they're hiding out in their house and the world falls down around them.

Kid: *Gasp* What was that noise?

Mother: *not too worried, but looking around* I don't know. It's gone now.

Kid: *shrugs* Okay.

*Three minute scene of them playing Monopoly*

*End Scene. Go to storyline B.*
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 14, 2015, 12:02:16 PM
Oh! And let's talk about wasted potential in Fear. Such as the great scene in episode three where the LA skyline is going dark, grid by grid, and our characters -- who have just fled a burning hospital -- finally realize that the end has come.

This scene (which The Strain has used for the same effect three times so far!) is very well done because it's on a TWD franchise budget But.it comes a bit too early It's designed to drive home what's at stake, and that the apocalypse is upon us, but not all the characters or the show itself is on that page yet. There's still authority, government, and calm people thinking this is just bath salts or some shit. we're really rushing here...and there are more subtle ways that they can do this which would lead up to the Final Days.

So, case in point, it's not long after that scene when the same people are taking out their trash..and having it picked up normally!

Also, the lights going off scene is ruined by the fact that two people are having a conversation in a pick-up truck through it. And, when I say that, I mean that one person is in the cab and the other is in the bed and the connecting window is closed and they're driving at 50 mph and the police are shooting automatic rifles everywhere and the two people are talking in normal indoor voices as if they're sitting intimately in a kitchen.  That's almost as bad as last episode's shining a flashlight at a window in order to see through the window into the night.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 20, 2015, 11:51:42 PM
With only two episodes after this one, literally nothing happened. Everyone is camped out in the safe zone living their regular lives.

Though, of course, our stars are suspicious that, maybe, the military can't be trusted. They slooooowly learn this by sneaking out and seeing what the army is up to.

Somehow, though, they fail to learn this early on by simply observing how the leaders are all obviously insane, have lost all control, and aren't in contact with anybody in charge.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on September 21, 2015, 02:36:07 PM
A buddy posted this on FB:

Quote
Well... they hit a new level tonight... not one zombie during the entire show tonight. Not one! The military put up a fence... don't know why... and everybody is scared, though you wouldn't know it because they were pretty busy hanging out in the pool and painting their house and... well... y'know... carrying on like a typical zombie apocalypse would make one carry on... NOT!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 21, 2015, 06:56:03 PM
A buddy posted this on FB:

Quote
Well... they hit a new level tonight... not one zombie during the entire show tonight. Not one! The military put up a fence... don't know why... and everybody is scared, though you wouldn't know it because they were pretty busy hanging out in the pool and painting their house and... well... y'know... carrying on like a typical zombie apocalypse would make one carry on... NOT!

Your buddy must not be watching the parent show. The LA Safe Zone is part of the Safe Zone program that was set up everywhere in the US. The parent show is currently holed up at the Alexandria Safe Zone outside DC, and they've spent the last 25 issues of the comic there.

So what Fear is doing is actually explaining how the Safe Zone program was set up (and, ultimately, failed). All a subplot, by the way, that's directly ripped off from World War Z.

The problem is...we don't care!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 28, 2015, 10:39:13 AM
Plenty of zombies last night, but still so Danny haphazard in the storytelling. We've spent lots of time establishing that the obviously up to no good military is up to no good.

So season one is all about gathering the Scooby Gang together...very slowly. Next week is the finale. Sigh.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 12, 2015, 10:49:12 AM
Wow...this show doesn't care anymore...

So the two hour season six premiere is set a few months after season 5's finale, and is mainly just Rick pushing all the soft Alexandrians to pull together and work to build a baffle for a massive herd of zombies that they're trying to drive away from the Safe Zone.

We get plenty of great zombie effects...and their budget for season six is clearly 1.7 billion dollars an episode.

But all that only gets about 30 minutes screen time. The premiere is largly composed of black and white flashbacks to the events immediately following season 5's finale. These flashbacks are told vaguely out of sequence, or perhaps as little "day in the life" snippets with the through-line being Rick's slow takeover and how everyone is making peace with that. So the foundation of Rick's Safe Zone comes in these disjointed flashbacks.

And, thoughout it all, it's arty, narrative-driven, and captivating. Really some of the best stuff this show has offered us...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 26, 2015, 12:28:27 AM
So the great thing about having a series that makes more money than God...you can have the first three episodes take place in the same five minutes.

So episode one is mainly flashbacks during an operation to lead a herd of zombies away.

Episode two is what happened at the Safe Zone during that operation.

Episode three is what happened at the operation while what was happening at the Safe Zone was happening.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 26, 2015, 12:35:29 AM
So, at this rate, episode four will be about the dog that saw the zombie that joined the herd that showed up on episode one
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 03, 2015, 08:19:13 AM
So, at this rate, episode four will be about the dog that saw the zombie that joined the herd that showed up on episode one

Almost! Actually, the latest episode was a two hour origin story filling in the details about Morgan's character from when we last saw him in season two and explaining why he's now a Magical Black man.

Because we're talking about Lennie James here, I loved it. He always shines in these sort of shows -- he was the only good thing in Jericho.

Doing this has enraged fans because, of course, everyone wants to know if the beloved Glenn is dead or not. But we won't know anytime soon because this show can do whatever it wants and, hey, that's kind of awesome. Even with the teaser for the next episode, you can't be sure if it's going to be a black and white side-story set three years in the past or if it'll just be a straight-up storyline episode.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 16, 2015, 09:03:58 AM
There's two episodes left this season and, in show time, only a day has passed. We're following four separate yet simultaneous storylines, all of which are slowly re-converging.

Very interesting. I like that the show just doesn't care anymore.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 24, 2015, 08:31:54 AM
Man, this show...

I've actually lost track of where everyone is in space and time. I think we're all back together and it's just Glenn still trapped outside Alexandria.

But that doesn't matter because the wall's about to come down!

Then we have our "mid-season finale" and then we finish off the back half of this season with negan -- who, in the comics, was basically The Governor Mark 2.

If they stay this close to the comic, season 7 will be a one year later season and focused mainly on trade agreements.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 31, 2015, 01:51:50 PM
Yay.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on January 09, 2016, 10:27:26 AM
This comes on the announcement that Fear the Walking Dead will pick up a week after TWD proper ends and, with a mid-season hiatus, end about a month before TWD comes back. So... Year round Walking Dead! (Plus, I've heard rumors about a third spin-off if Fear continues to hold water... Lots of talk about the "last lab" in Europe that was working on the plague has been floating around the net.)

Quote
Currently in its sixth season, The Walking Dead is reaching the point where most shows start to think about wrapping up the narrative. But The Walking Dead isn’t most shows.

In an interview with Vulture, AMC network chief Charlie Collier and programming boss Joel Stillerman chatted about the unique formula of The Walking Dead, and how they believe the biggest show on television could potentially run for, well, ever. Stillerman said the formula is a simple one, and basically goes back to what creator Robert Kirkman was trying to do when he conceived the comic book that started it all — show what comes after the typical ending of a zombie movie.

The comic has been telling that story for more than a decade, and judging by where the narrative is at the moment, still has quite a ways to go in the years to come. With the television adaptation, Stillerman said they wanted to replicate that sense of a never-ending world.

Here’s an excerpt from his comments:

“What’s so fascinating about The Walking Dead is that Robert Kirkman set out to do something that proved to be remarkably brilliant in a couple of very fundamental ways. One is he wanted to use the world of the zombie apocalypse as a way to get at social commentary. That was always the killer app for the show. But if you ask Robert what his motivations were for writing The Walking Dead, he would say, “I loved zombie movies, but I just felt like the worst part of them was always the ending. You always had to manufacture some ending.” So he set out to write this totally open-ended story, and the proof of that is in how vibrant the comics are.

The answer to how long the show will go on in some way is directly correlated with the health of the storytelling in the comics. Those comics are firing on all cylinders. He still writes every line of dialogue in those books, and is as engaged as he was when I think he was sitting around in Kentucky writing the first issue. That is very much part of the DNA of the show. He sort of felt like, in real life, this goes on for a very long time. We’re along for that ride.”

So, it begs the question — is AMC even having conversations about when the show might end? No, at least according to Collier. Instead of trying to lead the narrative toward an inevitable conclusion, Collier said they’re trying to keep the series as inventive and interesting as possible so it can keep on trucking. Hey, it’s worked for The CW’s Supernatural (currently in its 11th season), so why not Walking Dead?

Here’s an excerpt from his Collier:

“I will tell you we are not actively talking about the end of The Walking Dead. We’re talking about how to keep this No. 1 show on television feeling as fresh as it does in season six. As a brand, we’re very sensitive to making sure that every aspect of it feels fresh and original, and that it’s not treated in any way that’s derivative or taken for granted. Our planning is current and future-focused, and it is not focused on the end at this time.”

It’s amazing to think that six seasons in, and it still feels like we’ve only scratched the surface of how big this story could become. Just looking to the comic for inspiration, there are so many gigantic (and interesting!) stories left to tell.

Which, if the ratings hold up to the mind-boggling average, who knows how long this show could go on?
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 14, 2016, 11:18:39 PM
The season 6.5 premiere was a fucking extraordinary hour of television. Wow.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 23, 2016, 03:30:32 PM
I'm very curious about next Sunday's episode. We're going to meet Negan, it looks like. With three episodes to go, they might stretch it out a bit... But, certainly, the penultimate episode and the finale are going to be all about Negan.

Negan, essentially. soft-rebooted the comics. He killed a major character, changed the lives of all the other characters, and was the final sort of baptism by fire for the Alexandria Safe Zone. The comics even did a "one year later" break not too long after the Negan arc.

In TV show terms, we're back to being very close to the comics... And you know this cast has to be getting tired of these roles. So they're either going to take the safe approach, or they're going to do something wildly insane.

One of the newcomers, and Daryl, have hinted that it'll be something insane. Rick and Michonne just got a love story subplot at the end of the last episode, so my gut tells me it'll be one of them who doesn't survive this season.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 07, 2016, 04:07:45 PM
Man, TWD has taken a weird turn. So I think next week is the finale... And they've filmed two endings, so nobody knows what's going to happen. Someone's going to die... And we have pregnant Maggie and Carol in the hands of Negan's people right now.

So much of the latest episode was spent trying to confuse us. All of the "this character is going to die" cues were played out across multiple characters. There are six of them who each had a stereotypical "going to die" trope play out.

Though now we know it isn't Glenn (who buys it in the comics).

Meanwhile, the show sort of reinvented itself last night and took that final step towards answering the "are our heroes actually the villains?" question.

Meanwhile, Fear the Walking Dead returns in a month and is getting major hype. It actually looks good now.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 14, 2016, 11:46:48 AM
So we're there. Rick and Company are the bad guys in this show.

That's complicated for the viewer, because now the whole thing shifts from a group of heroes surviving to a group of complicated characters who have now been dragged, by Rick, into something of a moral quandary. They're all being forced by Rick to be cold-blooded killers, and that's being used to play with them as, one by one, they realize that what they're doing is wrong. But from a stroytelling perspective, the only redemption is for Rick to die. Either Negan -- who remains elusive -- has to kill him, or someone from our cast has to revolt.

The more I think about it, the more I think this is the direction we're going in. Rick's certainly been on a self-destructive trajectory for the last three seasons now.

But if their plan is to keep our cast evil, and try to convince us that they've been forced to make these choices in light of Negan, a greater evil, then that's going to be a hard story to tell. Because I no longer like the cast, and it'll be hard to win that trust back.

Another possibility -- they're planning a Blake's 7 style mass-kill. I'm thinking Fear the Walking Dead is going to test that approach next season, and TWD will do it when they return next year.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 28, 2016, 11:21:00 AM
So the penultimate episode featured both the best and the worst of this show, an was still shocking.

Next week is the 90 minute finale. Right now, it looks like it's being set up for a mass title character kill. In fact, that may have started at the end of this episode.

Internet meltdown in t-minus six days...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 11, 2016, 12:35:40 PM
The Walking Dead finale was exactly what a show should not do with a cliffhanger. They've been teasing the arrival of Negan all season while at the same time trying to play down the arrival and suggest that they may break from the comics once and for all. They've been teasing death all season -- including faking a character's death Soap Opera style and removing his name from the credits for two episodes. They give us a two hour season finale that meanders wildly, gives the Idiot Ball to every single main character, and finally reveals Negan...for a few minutes. The comics are reenacted exactly and...the big uber kill we've been waiting for is hidden from us. It's from the POV of the victim, who we do not know.

Roll credits, the end, see you in October.

It was cheap, lazy, and stupid.

Now, on the flipside, the season 2 premiere of Fear the Walking Dead was exactly how a show should open up! The fall of society is vividly played out with desperate radio messages and the bombing of Santa Monica. The desperate flight onto the good yacht Abigail is the perfect way to truly begin this series. We are thrust fast and hard into the action, and the slowly creeping reality that everything ended is beautifully handled. "It was all over before I knew it had begun," says one of the characters of the fall of civilization to an anonymous voice on the radio.

These are not the hardened killers of the parent series. These are soft, ordinary people who stare in horror as the Air Force bombards their city.

The use of radio messages is lovely -- a call goes out from a nearby Coast Guard base: "There's no shelter here. No food. No water. There's nothing that we can do to help you... Please...forgive us."

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 29, 2016, 10:59:17 AM
Fear he Walking Dead is so far off base it's almost unwatchable. They're all stuck on a luxury yacht and they're all holding the idiot ball, episode after episode. They make decisions no right-thinking person would again and again. The motivations are unclear for everyone and half the characters are so silent and interchangeable I keep forgetting who they are. They aren't even effective red shirts.

All this is such a sad squandering of what could be a great show. They are observers of the apocalypse, and they're on a clock that's quickly winding down. They should be telling the story of the horror that's playing out through the radio and their occasional stops along the shoreline. Instead they're trying to create distracting drama that doesn't matter.

But... Here I am, looking forward to the next episode. Ugh.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on May 04, 2016, 03:08:21 PM
Wow! We actually got a good episode last weekend for Fear. Characters were developed, the crew worked together, the bad guys were interesting, and we got some apocalypse shoreline stuff as well as backstory.

I was shocked!
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on May 16, 2016, 11:30:48 AM
Fear the Walking Dead;s penultimate episode... Jesus..

Okay, so we've spent all season pushing south because bad boy Strand is a Mexican drug lord's gay lover and the drug lord has an El Mariachi style compound on the coast of Baja. The problem: They have to buy their way through a blockade at the US/Mexican border.

So... The entire west coast of the US has been firebombed, all radio signals have stopped, the world has ended. Presumably, Mexico's not in any better shape. In fact, when our heroes do bust through the blockade they make landfall in Baja and note that the blockade isn't pursuing them because "they're confident whatever is on land will kill us."

But...then... Who is running this blockade? Who's supplying it? Why is it set up at the border if there are no longer any borders to defend? And how is this blockade so impassable to a group of people in a long-range, self-sustaining, ocean-going yacht? Have the mystery blockaders blockaded the entire Pacific Ocean?

Anyway, whatever. They get through and head to the compound where gay boy is dying but everything else is hunky dory. However, what they're actually doing is setting up a retread of season two of TWD -- the compound is the farm. The major domo is keeping zombies locked up in the cellar for the same reasons -- they're our friends and neighbors. Our heroes are faced with the same plight as on TWD.

Fortunately, it looks like they'll wrap this up in the finale instead of, as on TWD, taking the ENTIRE SEASON to make the only obvious and possible choice.

I don't know. At least they're off the boat and they have a compound and a few dozen redshirts.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on May 23, 2016, 10:10:40 AM
The Fear the Walking dead mid-season finale was so awful I couldn't even follow the storyline. I even had to fast forward through a couple especially frustrating scenes. This show is very close to personal cancellation...
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 23, 2016, 12:30:39 PM
Fear the Walking Dead is back for the second half of season 2. The premiere was actually okay! Nick has left the group and the whole premiere was his (largely wordless, except for pre-apocalypse flashbacks) weird, moody, half-sick journey through the desert to Tijuana. Lots of zombies, lots of tense moments, lots of abandoned highways and villages. Very fun.

I have (and most reviewers have as well) had a hard time getting to know and learning to like the characters in Fear. The show hasn't really landed on a central character, and the ensemble just seems to fall flat. Splitting them up may change things, and removing the "poor Nick the addict" dynamic from the rest of the cast is a good idea. Now Nick can learn how to man up while the rest of the crew gets on with survival.

Though, of course, it's impossible for them to reunite. When TWD did this in season four, they were all being driven to Terminus, which had plastered most of Georgia, it seems, with signage. Here we have Nick in the middle of Mexico and everyone else back on the boat.

 
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on September 19, 2016, 01:10:04 PM
You know... Fear the Walking Dead is one strike away from making my personal cancellation list. It'll kill me to put a PA show on that list, but, Jesus. We're almost done with season two and we still don't know/can't identify with/aren't encouraged to care about the characters.

Worse, the characters don't behave consistently or rationally at all. Almost every episode sees every character behaving out of character or carrying the Idiot Ball. It's maddening.

The greatest sin of all, though, is that this is a story about the first days (weeks) or the apocalypse and yet it takes everything learned over the years in the parent show for granted. The zombies, meanwhile, are almost openly treated like extras in a TV show as opposed to a serious menace or threat. It's weird and off-putting and a disservice to the already paper-thin franchise.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 03, 2016, 10:09:03 AM
Well, thank god. Fear The Walking Dead is over. We actually got some walkers in the finale as well instead of mindless and irrational family drama that wouldn't even make sense or be possible if the world hadn't of ended. Just about every meaningful death happened off screen, told by unreliable narrators. We did get our fair share of family drama. Also fun to see that the US-Mexican border is defended at full strength along it's entire length. Someone might want to remind the writers that there's been an apocalypse and, at the same time as FTWD, the rest of America had completely fallen apart and all contact with anyone in authority had been lost. But, nah. Not in California. Troops enough to defend a 300 mile front line and shoot Mexicans there, even in the middle of a desert wasteland. Easy.

(If you're going to write that in, then you have to explain why they simply haven't taken back, like, all of San Diego or something.)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 19, 2016, 06:27:00 PM
Thank you, John Cleese. Non-TWD watchers...um...this is all you need to get caught up. Sadly.

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on October 24, 2016, 07:47:45 AM
The season 7 premiere did two important things.

1) It jumped the shark
2) It rebooted the series back to before the last time it jumped the shark

But the problem is that it wasn't yet another step on our hero's journeys, just more of a corrective. Seven seasons, and about 3 years in-show, and we need an episode where Rick learns to lose his optimism, embrace despair, and harden up? This is the Ricktator! This is the guy who bites peoples throats out. Having Negan become a supervillain and all that term implies makes some sense in the comics but not in this show where he's just another in a long line of supervillains.

"But he has an army." Rick says.

So did Terminus. So did the Governor. So do the walking dead all around them. What Negan has isn't anything new so the whole "sea change pivotal point in the series" is really just about Rick making a mistake and getting caught, but we know he'll dig out of it in the end. Why? Because he always makes mistakes and pays for it. Because he didn't kill the Governor when he had the chance, we lost beloved characters. Because he didn't kill the Terminus folks when he had a chance, we lost beloved characters.

So why is it a big deal that we lose beloved characters now? Because it's a scene from the comic book as opposed to something that's actually surprising, interesting, and independent to this storyline that is independent from the comic book already! 

Getting back in bed with the comic book narrative after they've pretty much spent the last three seasons diverging from it has to be the stupidest thing this show has done. I saw it last night -- it'll kill this show. The first blow was dealt. They've hit the end of the writer's room thread.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on October 25, 2016, 03:01:50 PM
Facebook makes me hate this show... the same way it makes me hate Game of Thrones and the U.S. presidential election.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 05, 2016, 05:00:19 PM
You know...that premiere was so disappointing that I can't bring myself to watch the second episode. And now we're getting an "extra long" third episode... Of course, episodes 1 and 2 were both 78 minutes. So... What now? Two hours of pandering to the comic books and exploring gore excessive even to a gorehound like me?

I'm debating a personal cancellation here. It took seven years...but, man.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 06, 2016, 12:44:58 AM
Okay... Episode two,  which is Carol and Morgan in the Kingdom, was fine.

But,  still... This show has studiously avoided the comics for four years and is now aping them almost frame by frame. You really can't have it both ways. This season still feels awkward and ill-conceived.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 07, 2016, 08:26:42 AM
So that extra long 90 minute episode had 38 minutes of commercials.

Just saying.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 21, 2016, 11:23:14 AM
So I guess we should just embrace the idea that this show has rebooted into a comedy.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on November 29, 2016, 11:06:36 AM
This show has gone from goofy comedy to totally off the rails. We're now catching up with two characters we haven't seen since March. The cold open was like it came from an episode of Lost. The motivations of the characters is...alien, at best. I spent half the episode laughing out loud and the other half wondering if I had somehow missed an entire season of bridging episodes...

Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on December 15, 2016, 10:30:56 AM
I was going to comment on the mid-season finale...but I don't actually remember any of it. This season of 90 minute episodes has achieved absolutely nothing.

Meanwhile, the ratings are tanking. They're still high, because the whole world was watching this show... But they've taken a brutal hit and I don't think they'll dig out. They've shifted from "anyone can die" to "no one can die unless we're just aping the comics or trying to be needlessly showy in a way that doesn't involve narrative storytelling at all."
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on February 20, 2017, 10:18:02 AM
Walking Dead has been doing better here on the back half of season 7. Mainly because they've given up and embraced the whole Beyond Thunderdome theme...complete with PA spike-wearing warriors and Captain Walker-type child communities that speak in a post-apocalypse dialect that would have taken generations to develop properly.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on March 06, 2017, 10:23:50 AM
Well, we're officially into the original extended-cut-of-Dawn of the Dead comedic walkers on this show. All we need is the replacement music in the American version of the movie where walkers are bumping around and falling down and generally being "they are us."

Which is fine. The dead have actually been slowly phased out of this show in favor of the conflict between surviving groups. In the comics, the occasional "herd" is a problem but, generally, they're now about the growing pains of Rick's little federation of communities.

A logical (and, at this point, welcome) way to end this series is to eliminate this last Big Bad, form the federation of communities, fast forward to one year later for an epilogue and a vague cliffhanger to leave things open for a movie down the line and then bid us all farewell.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 03, 2017, 10:23:58 AM
The finale was pretty good. The fight at the end was downright awesome (even though it made no sense -- like how did the Hilltop and Kingdom armies get inside Alexandria?).

Two problems -- the emotional soul/shocking twist in this episode was completely ruined. The character at the center of it is the new lead in Star Trek Discovery, so we've long known her days were numbered. It's also troubling because she's yet another black character who dies horridly, which is something TWD is very guilty of exploiting.

It also resolved nothing! This has been a very touchy season for the show and we end it with the knowledge that the entire season was just one, long, bizarre prologue for the real conflict to come. It's basically like if Army of Darkness had ended when Ash stood on the ramparts and said he would fight the Deadites. Except it took us 10 hours to get there.

Anyway. This fucking show.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on April 03, 2017, 11:52:24 AM
I've decided that not committing to TWD is one of the better life choices I've made.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 03, 2017, 01:38:15 PM
You're probably right.

I always find myself thinking back to that, frankly, glorious and perfect pilot episode. What happened? Where did it all go wrong? (Episode two.)
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: RottingCorpse on April 03, 2017, 02:23:13 PM
The pilot was great. I'm very glad I watched it. The next two episodes didn't pull me in. And now I read friends comments about it and the show just seems like this crappy job that everybody wants to quit, but the money and benefits are too good, and really there are way harder jobs than this.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 03, 2017, 02:39:17 PM
The only reason we're watching is because we want to see Andrew Lincoln die horribly. Preferably in really slow motion.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on June 06, 2017, 12:53:00 PM
Fear the Walking dead is back. The two hour premiere was a silly mess, as usual, where nobody behaves with any sense of logic. Like, the bad guys who have murdered hundreds of people in cold blood become good guys instantly because the dead overrun the base. So now everyone bands together and sucks each other's dicks when, literally, 30 seconds before one person had removed another person's eyeball with a spoon and a main character got fed to zombies while everyone laughed.

So...yeah. But that's TWD. I don't know what I expected. I'm just glad people are dying. Our main cast is down to three people. Hopefully ALL THREE OF THEM WILL DIE SOON! Then the show can reboot with interesting characters and go on the road instead of endlessly moving around the same 200 yards of the Mexico/CA border despite days and days and days and days of walking/boating/flying/driving.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on August 11, 2017, 01:13:00 PM
Well! This is interesting:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/walking-dead-creator-robert-kirkman-leaving-amc-signs-1797747694

So TWD will be moving to Amazon eventually? That'll be a blow to AMC.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on April 17, 2018, 02:58:53 PM
So Fear the Walking Dead gets a soft reboot -- we move forward about 2 years to catch up with the parent series, Garret Dillahunt is introduced as a Texas gunslinger, Jenna Elfman as a plucky journalist in a Dead Reckoning sort of vehicle, and Morgan crosses over from the parent series. We don't see the main cast till the very end, and it looks like things have gone crazy.

This season will be split into multiple timelines:

Quote
Those timelines are:

• Morgan's story, which is happening a few months after the events of The Walking Dead's Season 8 finale and includes present-day Madison (Kim Dickens).

• Madison's story of how her family became the roadside bandits who met Morgan, which will start about a year after the events of Fear's Season 3 finale.

• And presumably (this one has not been seen in the first two episodes sent to critics) the year between the Season 3 finale and where Madison's story picks up, which will fill in the rest of the time jump that kicks off Season 4.
Title: Re: Walking Dead
Post by: nacho on June 11, 2018, 11:12:34 AM
Man, Fear the Walking Dead is a shitfest. They've spent the first half of thise season slowly killing off the stars and moving in new ones... And there are rumors that Rick (who leaves TWD next year) will be coming over to Fear! Why are we still watching this show...?