The Walking Dead TV series courtesy of AMC.

[Taiso]

I had a huge response typed up and deleted it.

Digging the show. A lot more than the first season. That is all.

 

[Castor Troy]

Liked this episode (probably the best episode this season).
Only downside for me was the whole "He saw the deer!" speech.
*also never read the comics*

 

[SonGohan]

I liked this episode, but I'm having a problem with a brightly lit, 2 story home not attracting a single walker in the middle of the night.

 

[Castor Troy]

I liked this episode, but I'm having a problem with a brightly lit, 2 story home not attracting a single walker in the middle of the night.

When Glenn and T-Dawg(?) drove there, that sexy chick asked Glenn if he closed the perimeter gate. IDK, I assumed the place has a decent barrier around the area.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

So I guess I'm the only one who didn't like this one, huh? I have to admit I'm a bit surprised. I thought the crummy pacing was really starting to weigh things down, and I'm starting to get tired of what's happening.

I had a huge response typed up and deleted it.

Digging the show. A lot more than the first season. That is all.

I really and truly mean no offense when I say this, but let's be real: You were probably going to like this show no matter what. That's not a bad thing -- I do it myself all the time to other stuff -- but you're willing to forgive pretty much anything when it comes to Walking Dead related stuff.

 

[Eric]

I'll stand by what I said: they seem to have had a 6 episode season that they are stretching out to fulfill a 13 episode order. This missing girl storyline needs to just resolve itself one way or another.

And I can accept them not showing any zombies at the farm because as much as the show is billed as a zombie show, it doesn't mean that every situation, setting, or scene needs to revolve around the zombies. The farm just serves as a setting for the characters to have their moments even if I think the Lori thinking it's better for her son to die stuff just seems like complete nonsense and out of her character for the sake of having that "is it better to continue living or to die" conversation again. The scenes at the end of the CDC were enough on that debate for now, I think.

PS: Glenn is an awesome character. Probably one of most people's favorites from the comic.

 

[Taiso]

I really and truly mean no offense when I say this, but let's be real: You were probably going to like this show no matter what. That's not a bad thing -- I do it myself all the time to other stuff -- but you're willing to forgive pretty much anything when it comes to Walking Dead related stuff.

Well, I really and truly mean no offense when I say you are completely wrong in this assertion.

I believe I'm the one who said the comic hasn't been as good lately. I also said I hate characters like Michonne, who are fan favorites. I also criticized the first season's flaws and dislike how this season is making me dislike characters that I should probably be liking, or at least sympathizing with.

I've criticized TWD well enough. But if you're going to make the assertion that I can't be objective about it, I'm not going to waste any more time talking about it with you.

 

[GregN]

I thought the last episode was kind of a snore, myself.

 

[Taiso]

Zombies: all about them Bennies.

 

[Hot Chocolate]

Zombies: all about them Bennies.

They see reanimated corpse and I see straight cash money, we gone ball large and hard

 

[evil wasabi]

I just realized I only know one character's name, and I have watched every episode. Everyone else is cop, cop's wife, other cop, Merle's brother, old guy, black guy, old woman, blond girl, asian dude, and younglings.

Character development? I guess. If there were really characters.

I did like the end of last night's episode where other cop dude showed his survival skills off with fat guy.

 

[dspoonrt]

I just realized I only know one character's name, and I have watched every episode. Everyone else is cop, cop's wife, other cop, Merle's brother, old guy, black guy, old woman, blond girl, asian dude, and younglings.

Character development? I guess. If there were really characters.

I did like the end of last night's episode where other cop dude showed his survival skills off with fat guy.

I don't think that your lack of familiarity with the characters' names is really evidence of an absence of character development. I'd say it's more of an attention/memory issue. Granted, some of the characters have not been fully developed yet (it's still early in the second season), but many of the characters have been fleshed out - Rick, Lori, and Shane have been given detailed back stories, defining moral dilemmas, and copious amounts of dialogue to shed light on each character's motivations.

 

[evil wasabi]

uh huh.

 

[Wachenroder]

I don't know about this series anymore. The more I watch, the more evident it becomes that they should have stuck closer to the source material. I'll keep watching though. It's still a decent under its own merits. Just lacking I guess.

Judging from the ending of this episode, they are going to fully antagonize Shane and he and Rick are going to face towards the end of this season for sure.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

Well, I really and truly mean no offense when I say you are completely wrong in this assertion.

I believe I'm the one who said the comic hasn't been as good lately. I also said I hate characters like Michonne, who are fan favorites. I also criticized the first season's flaws and dislike how this season is making me dislike characters that I should probably be liking, or at least sympathizing with.

I've criticized TWD well enough. But if you're going to make the assertion that I can't be objective about it, I'm not going to waste any more time talking about it with you.

Well, yeah. I'm not saying you're a googly-eyed fan, but I don't think you're being that objective. Not that anyone is, really... All I'm saying is you're going to forgive a lot when it comes to this show, and that's worth keeping in mind, that's all.

 

[evil wasabi]

Well, yeah. I'm not saying you're a googly-eyed fan, but I don't think you're being that objective. Not that anyone is, really... All I'm saying is you're going to forgive a lot when it comes to this show, and that's worth keeping in mind, that's all.

Taiso has a lot of really interesting things to say about stuff that isn't related to TWD, so I just ignore his posts on this subject. They're way too biased toward defending a very (extremely) mediocre show. And it's kind of typical I guess. When someone attacks something you have become emotionally invested in (such as here by reading the comics), one person's attack on the material may ignite your counter-reaction to defend it. Or vice versa.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

Taiso has a lot of really interesting things to say about stuff that isn't related to TWD, so I just ignore his posts on this subject. They're way too biased toward defending a very (extremely) mediocre show. And it's kind of typical I guess. When someone attacks something you have become emotionally invested in (such as here by reading the comics), one person's attack on the material may ignite your counter-reaction to defend it. Or vice versa.

I didn't mean to sound like I'm ignoring him, because I'm not. I was trying to say precisely what you just said yourself: That the show is okay, not great, and he's maybe being a bit of an apologist. That's all.

To me emotional investment doesn't enter into it, but I realize it does for other people. So you're spot on there.

Still, Taiso is a smart guy and it's generally worth hearing what he has to say, even if you're inclined to disagree.

 

[Taiso]

I respect people too much to disagree with them without being as objective as I possibly can.

I would not, given who I am today and after my life's experiences, waste anyone's time arguing something at length unless I held it to be objectively true.

I would not post a wall of text without intelligently asserting my view.

I find the whole assertion that 'Taiso can't view TWD objectively' disheartening. Why not extend that mindset to me as it regards AC or RE or Berserk or any of the other things I love and can talk at length about?

The truth of the matter is that the things I love...I look at in great depth and detail. When I see what I think are problems, I point them out. When I see things that I believe others are mistaken about, I point it out.

You can disagree with my assertions, but please don't do me the disservice of dismissing what I say on the basis that you innacurately believe I'm being 'an apologist.' That kind of hurts.

And before anyone says 'it's the internet, who cares?' I don't come here to chat idly. I come here to exchange ideas and engage in intelligent discourse with others. My frequent walls of text should tell you as much.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

But you shouldn't think it's essential to be objective for me to respect your opinion (which, like I said, I do), or for your opinion to be perfectly valid.

I think you're holding yourself to an unreasonable standard if you want to achieve that goal. It's just not possible, unless you're some kind of emotionless monster (and even then I doubt you could pull it off).

More to the point, I don't disagree with your criticisms of the show. But the fact that you love the show so much anyway, in spite of those very criticisms, kind of outs you as something of a fanboy, that's all. There's nothing at all wrong with that. I'm a huge fanboy when it comes to some things (okay, a lot of things), and I'd like to think you value my opinion, even if only a little.

Hearing what you like about something is worthwhile, even if I don't agree, and even if I think you're basing your opinion on something I can't replicate in my own experience (like, say, an emotional attachment to the material).

 

[evil wasabi]

I find the whole assertion that 'Taiso can't view TWD objectively' disheartening. Why not extend that mindset to me as it regards AC or RE or Berserk or any of the other things I love and can talk at length about?

Because the stuff you say about those things are truth.

 

[Taiso]

But you shouldn't think it's essential to be objective for me to respect your opinion (which, like I said, I do), or for your opinion to be perfectly valid.

If I'm going to take time out of my life to post here, it's because I want to engage in discourse about a particular subject.

When I do that, I don't want that opinion to be disregarded as the ravings of a fanboy.

If you want to disregard them because you disagree with them, that is one thing.

But if you want to disregard them because you won't even consider me a valid source, then that is going to bother me because that's not how I do things.

I think you're holding yourself to an unreasonable standard if you want to achieve that goal. It's just not possible, unless you're some kind of emotionless monster (and even then I doubt you could pull it off).

And I think I do a pretty good job of seeing what I like, seeing WHY I like it and stating it intelligently. I don't give anything a get out of jail free card when I see a flaw in it simply on the basis that it's part of something I love.

More to the point, I don't disagree with your criticisms of the show. But the fact that you love the show so much anyway, in spite of those very criticisms, kind of outs you as something of a fanboy, that's all. There's nothing at all wrong with that. I'm a huge fanboy when it comes to some things (okay, a lot of things), and I'd like to think you value my opinion, even if only a little.

So wait.

I can't love something that has flaws?

I've pointed out what I see as the flaws and don't find them damning enough to call the show 'mediocre' or 'dumb fun' like you and Wasabi have.

You see more flaws than I do.

I am saying those things are not 'flaws.' Rather, they're elements you don't like, which affect the show's overall appeal for you.

That is our disagreement. But you'll notice I haven't said 'well, HN and Wasabi just don't understand the material' or 'HN and Wasabi are comparing it to shows they hold in higher esteem and expecting it to live up to an impossible ideal.'

But you'll notice I haven't done that. I wouldn't straw man either of you like that.

I'd argue against the points you're making and take you at face value.

Because I respect you both and am not creating false interpretations of who you are in order to support my side of the argument.

Hearing what you like about something is worthwhile, even if I don't agree, and even if I think you're basing your opinion on something I can't replicate in my own experience (like, say, an emotional attachment to the material).

My emotional attachment to TWD is based on me discerning it as a worthy product from an intelligent and informed point of view. I understand its dystopian themes and human dynamics in a world of anarchy and find any fictional material that explores those themes engrossing. TWD does it better than most zombie fare, and it does so with the added burden of having no endgame. It's the Romero movie that never ends.

Because the stuff you say about those things are truth.

And it's exactly the same with TWD, except that you disagree with me on TWD.

So it's not a case of me being an apologist about it. It's a case of you disagreeing with me and then unfairly discrediting my point of view by claiming I'm seeing the material through rose colored glasses.

And I'm telling you it's just not the case. It's just not my MO.

And this is the last I'm going to say on the subject. I don't want this thread to be about me. It just hurt to be so horribly misunderstood by two pretty cool guys at this site. I'm sorry to everyone for stretching this out. I won't discuss this subject anymore, and hopefully we can get back to talking about the show.

 

[evil wasabi]

An important question is whether you understand the human dynamics from the show, or more because you read the comics? Because the show isn't really giving me much in human dynamics.

 

[Taiso]

An important question is whether you understand the human dynamics from the show, or more because you read the comics? Because the show isn't really giving me much in human dynamics.

There are some situations that I feel are setting the table for the characters, or exploring why they are doing the things they are doing as a form of psychological grist. But I will give you the best example that comes directly out of the show because

Spoiler:

in the comic, Shane's been dead since the group left Atlanta. The issue with his death happened seven years ago IRL, and over a year ago in the comic's continuity.

Lori gives up on the world, on Carl and even on Rick due to the circumstances. This shows her character flaws and, amazingly, puts the responsibility for the failure of their relationship on the female, not a traditional stance in fictional relationships. Rick subsequently explains why surviving in this world is still worth it with the example of Carl seeing the deer, which shows you a lot about the person Rick is and his optimistic viewpoint. He's a cop, but it's not just a job to him. He's a legitimate good guy and I think it's important for the show to establish why people with no real reason to live will keep on living. To simply say 'people don't want to die because it's a survival instinct' is scientific, dry and cold. It makes us no better than the zombies. Examples like this continue to cement what separates humans from the undead. We aren't just motorized instinct-that is an important theme of any dystopian zombie story. If the differences aren't pointed out, either directly or intuitively, then the zombies lose their threatening quality as empty vessels for all our fears and anxieties. So it's not just a character trait, it's a necessary mechanic of this kind of story.

In a world where hopes and dreams wither and die all too quickly, there needs to be people that will justify, to audiences, why they even bother. At the end of the CDC episode, the characters choose to live for all the bullshit reasons that are generally given in any TV show.

The reason Rick gives in this last episode is a far more admirable explanation on the part of the writers to justify it. That's why I love this season and why I didn't care much for the first season, overall.

The broken relationship makes it all the more believable that she'd have a tryst with Shane. And of course, they start to build something solid and a sort of family unit to push off the desperation of their circumstances. Shane leaving Rick at the hospital was a touch choice for him to make, but the fact that he made it and took his family shows that, at the end of the day, he is a 'me first' kind of guy. He provides protection and stability to her, something Rick isn't able to do because he's always running off to help people. Shane didn't do that. He stuck by Lori, or that's how she perceives it. And when she asks him to stay, she's betraying Rick yet again. She's asking Shane to stay because she's treating her own emotions more importantly than her moral obligation. Flawed and complex character dynamics, not simple 'character is an antagonist' typecasting (although I don't really like Lori as a result, but that's beside the point.)

When things went to hell, Shane represented the stability, safety and loyalty she needed. Rick was either in a hospital bed or running back into the city to save racists. Given how things have gone down, this presents a problem.

To contrast that with the comic version:

Once Carl gets hurt, Lori breaks down.The show did a better job of it than the comic, IMO. Although in a world where social mores no longer exist, some people might abandon otherwise 'sacred covenants' like, say, marriage. So in the comic, I just connected the dots for myself because there was never any precedent for who Lori was and what her personality was in the comic. It didn't seem unreasonable to me because I didn't know who she was, and I didn't walk into it with the preconception that just because Rick was a good guy, Lori would be a good girl. But the show lays the groundwork for the dynamic. Fictional premises need a different type of elaboration in visual form than in printed form.

Now, not ALL of the character dynamics in the show are quite so complex. And they may never get there. Or they may. This situation exists because of the world they live in. It's a traditional primetime drama love triangle, but presented in a world where all the rules of a modern world simply don't apply. That is the 'mixer' element that makes it so compelling-their choices are being driven by more than simple passion. There is survival and instinct at play as well. And Rick is the guy saying 'Carl remembered the deer.' Shane and Lori gave in to insecurity and fear.

This is what I see. I could similarly break down character dynamics in a show like Game of Thrones or Sons of Anarchy or The Borgias or some other TV show I really enjoy. These are the reasons I love character based dramas. It's about the examinations of the characters. It doesn't matter which fucking characters. As long as characters are being examined in great detail, I'm there. It's why I can say a show overcomes deliberate pacing or table setting plot developments that don't seem to go anywhere.

I've seen enough, and read enough, that I generally am confident as to whether or not a story is doing things in a satisfactory manner.

The first season of TWD had some flaws. The second season is not perfect, but I don't believe it's the mediocre product you say it is.

You can continue to believe I'm reading too much into it. That is your right. I don't think I am doing that. I'm seeing what is there, in my opinion.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

If I'm going to take time out of my life to post here, it's because I want to engage in discourse about a particular subject.

When I do that, I don't want that opinion to be disregarded as the ravings of a fanboy.

If you want to disregard them because you disagree with them, that is one thing.

But if you want to disregard them because you won't even consider me a valid source, then that is going to bother me because that's not how I do things.



And I think I do a pretty good job of seeing what I like, seeing WHY I like it and stating it intelligently. I don't give anything a get out of jail free card when I see a flaw in it simply on the basis that it's part of something I love.



So wait.

I can't love something that has flaws?

I've pointed out what I see as the flaws and don't find them damning enough to call the show 'mediocre' or 'dumb fun' like you and Wasabi have.

You see more flaws than I do.

I am saying those things are not 'flaws.' Rather, they're elements you don't like, which affect the show's overall appeal for you.

That is our disagreement. But you'll notice I haven't said 'well, HN and Wasabi just don't understand the material' or 'HN and Wasabi are comparing it to shows they hold in higher esteem and expecting it to live up to an impossible ideal.'

But you'll notice I haven't done that. I wouldn't straw man either of you like that.

I'd argue against the points you're making and take you at face value.

Because I respect you both and am not creating false interpretations of who you are in order to support my side of the argument.



My emotional attachment to TWD is based on me discerning it as a worthy product from an intelligent and informed point of view. I understand its dystopian themes and human dynamics in a world of anarchy and find any fictional material that explores those themes engrossing. TWD does it better than most zombie fare, and it does so with the added burden of having no endgame. It's the Romero movie that never ends.

I'm sorry, Taiso, but it's just plain impossible for a normal human being to be completely objective, and as I said before, you don't have to. You shouldn't even want to. We're just fans talking about things we like (or sort of like). I consider it a worthy conversation, obviously, but at the same time I don't take it deathly seriously.

Why does the term fanboy always have to mean something bad? To me it means you love something in spite of its flaws. There's nothing at all wrong with that (as long as you don't act like an idiot about it, and you haven't), and I don't think I'm making a straw man or anything. I'm certainly taking you at face value. To make a similar point to the one you did, I haven't said anything like, "Well, you just like the show because you have poor taste" or "You just like the show because you're dumb" or what have you.

For whatever reason, this material resonates with you. You have a particular fondness for it, clearly. Personally, I'm a big fan of certain types of story myself, and I'll be willing to forgive more flaws in those sorts of things. That's just what people are like. That's what everyone is like.

I still think this show is deeply flawed and, at the end of the day, not too special (at least not yet, I'm hoping it'll pick up). You disagree, and that's perfectly fine. You're saying you like it, and yes, you do provide good reasons why. But because those reasons are subjective (and again, how could they not be), I don't happen to agree. But like I said, I appreciate your thoughts and contributions and I wouldn't be writing this if I didn't.

 

[lithy]

So, if you haven't been enjoying the show anyway, last night wasn't going to do anything for you. Unless I missed something, it was mostly just set up for the rest of the season.

One thing to note though, the rose at the end was in a slightly blurred bottle of Sweetwater 420 Pale Ale. Brewed in Atlanta.