The Walking Dead

**megabyteme** · 12-06-2014, 07:52 AM

I remember you saying that it was going to happen. When you watch the episode, she makes a statement, and then does [something] that gets her [something]. I have an idea why she does what she says/does, but I would like your analysis as to what she means.

With her gone, I don't know how interested I will be from here on out. They seem to have pushed themselves into hopelessness all the way around. With only a couple of characters I still find any care for. Killing her off was a bad move, IMO.

Michonne, Daryl, and Carol. In that order. The rest range from "don't care" to "feed that fucking baby to the nearest Walker".

**IdolEyes787** · 12-06-2014, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by megabyteme

I remember you saying that it was going to happen. When you watch the episode, she makes a statement, and then does [something] that gets her [something]. I have an idea why she does what she says/does, but I would like your analysis as to what she means.

Read enough "day after" stuff to guess you're referring to the "I get it now" statement.

Thematically I would assume this is an extension of the series mantra that innocence and to some extent good(see Hershel/Dale and various minor characters) has no place in this world.Scenewise I think it was simply "nothing is going to change with you here" and not one of self sacrifice.

Anyway if a show ever yearned for a hero but steadfastly refuses to give you one it is this one.
Rick has long since fallen to mere "protagonist" and the default one of Daryl is as a character so one dimensional that I fairly sure he avoids enemies by turning sideways and disappearing.

On a somewhat related note the producer went into great detail on Rick statement of "You can't go back,Bob" echoing Gareth and how Rick realized this but in the moment also saw the truth in it.So now Rick's a similar monster.Oh peachy.

**megabyteme** · 12-06-2014, 06:03 PM

I seem to remember you reading the graphic novels. What direction, if any, do they take? Has the series ventured into uncharted, navigationless waters, or is there a plot somewhere ahead?

**IdolEyes787** · 12-06-2014, 07:04 PM

At the risk of sounding repetitive they find another seemingly perfect place ad everything seems to be going good until things go horribly wrong and a bunch of characters die.There is also another governor type only with none of his redeeming qualities.

Being an actual scientifically proven psychic,I foretell a dropping in the ratings as the audience grows sick of the same old,same old.

Anyway I personally think the series works best when if varies location and gives some insight into stuff that is happening independent of the now sort of boring core group.They seem determined to stick to the stay in one boring place and alienate the fuck of me though.
They also seem unwilling to take certain characters like Coral into the truly dark territory that was the foundation of the comics and leave the truly vile stuff to the glorified red shirts.I think in movies/TV you need to better differentiate good and evil or else you run the risk of turning viewers off.
Again I 'd like to point out that it's entertainment and not real life and people look for something to root for,not puzzle over.

**megabyteme** · 12-07-2014, 02:55 AM

I have no trouble with the dismal. Live with a head full of it. Don't mind troubled characters. However, this season has just become bleak and directionless. The series has done a decent job of exploring various zombie apocalypse scenarios. Unfortunately, lost at sea makes for a boring drama without continuous struggles- which only work for short movie-length features, and possibly not a long-run series.

Kill that fucking baby first. FFS!

**Alien5** · 12-07-2014, 05:22 AM

Theres a myth amongst the zombies that a high performance human can outrun a zombie, they soon realize it was just a myth.

**IdolEyes787** · 12-07-2014, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by megabyteme

Don't mind troubled characters.

I see you didn't get my point.Dramatically it's essential that every hero be flawed or else everything is too obvious and boring*.The fact that they're flawed though doesn't negate they still need to be heroes.

Anyone that disagrees with this probably keeps snakes as pets.

*To illustrate: Skiz loves whatever ghey football team he loves but if he knew for a fact before the season started they were going to go undefeated, most if not all of the interest of watching would be taken away.
But then he'd also be rich from betting on them so I guess his new Chevy Silverado would be a OK trade-off.

**megabyteme** · 12-07-2014, 03:02 PM

I get the need for flawed heroes. His personal "growth" is what makes Daryl one of the characters I have started to like. Rick, on the other hand, has fallen into the "aww fuck it" category. He's now got less depth than Daryl had early on. Carol stepped up recently, which was kinda cool at the beginning of the season when she laid waste to the slaughterhouse. Michonne has long accepted the fact that things are shit, and she's going to survive. As long as everyone there works towards that interest, she'll stay- get too much off-track, and she'll cut-n-run.

When I say "troubled", I mean that as in full-blown antihero, if necessary. I don't need your Lancelot with a troubled heart for Guinevere level of hero. Heck, even the Governor was interesting. Before the Scooby Gang came along and fucked it up, they had a pretty decent community going. Not too unlike the US under the second Bush's reign. Sure, a few eggs get broken, but the omelette tastes alright...

I digress. My point is that directionless isn't much of a cliffhanger hiatus point. Beth represented the good worth fighting for.