|
Discussing the show and past episodes is fine. Do not put things that have happened in the TV series in spoilers. However, don't spoil things from the books that may happen in future episodes. Put book spoilers in spoiler tags with a CLEAR WARNING that it is from the book. |
On October 15 2012 13:14 freeshooter wrote:
I'm still at a loss why Michionne has those pet zombies. They look badass... but I'd be slightly disgruntled following after her with zombies next to me even though she cut off arms and carved out the mouths of them.
If you really want to know why she has pet zombies, and no one's mentioned it already
From comics:
+ Show Spoiler +One of them's her dead boyfriend, the other, the dead boyfriend's best friend. In the comics, Michonne has conversations with them as a coping mechanism
|
On October 16 2012 15:01 Holy_AT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 14:36 Zinnwaldite wrote:On October 16 2012 14:05 albis wrote:
i still get upset every time they use their guns to shoot zombies. hand to hand is working pretty damn effectively. save your ammo for worst case scenarios and mostly, for OTHER people. bullets are life in this environment. cherish them. They should find a museum of history and loot some swords and shit.. I'd use a halberd,, must be a great weapon against zombies.. Good reach,, chops off heads,, stabs brains,.. I thought the same thing and about the same weapon for open space combat, maybe some sword or short sword for buildings!
Phalanx with large shields and good swords for stabbing. The men behind you stabbing and killing downed zombies, replacing the wounded. Every inch of every room checked over.
|
get yourself a full body kevlar suit and the zombies would have almost 0 chance of getting threw. Whats more practical if they gathered a ton of empty pop cans flattened them all out and layer them then attach to clothing would make some good lightweight aluminum armour and with a caged hockey helmet for your head.
a really good sharp/lightweight samurai sword is probably the best hand to hand weapon since it will cut threw zombies like butter, the ninja black lady has it right.
|
On October 16 2012 04:32 LoLAdriankat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 04:22 acidstormy wrote:
it was a pretty solid episode, but it was so fucking lame how the zombie that bit hershel wasn't moving the first time they passed through, then WITH ALL ITS SWIFTNESS grabbed his leg when he came back... smart zomb? They're referred to as "lurkers" in The Walking Dead. They're the way they are because they've taken some sort of injury that prevents them from moving (damaged spine, legs, etc.) so they just wait. Comic spoilers + Show Spoiler +Robert Kirkman said in an interview that he wanted Hershel to lose his leg, but felt sorry for him since he lost half his children, so he had Allen lose his leg instead.
oh thanks for the clarification!! it moved pretty damn fast for being incapacitated though -___-
|
Normally the injury/decay causes lurkers to be unable to walk. They still can move just as quickly with their heads/remaining limbs to grab/bite someone. They're called lurkers simply because they can't walk so they just lay around lurking. When someone comes too close mistaking them as a dead corpse they attack, making them one of the most dangerous types of zombies as you never knew if it's a corpse or a lurker. Rick didn't get close enough cause he used his gun, but hershels leg was right next to the zombie, so he was able to attack.
|
Someone mentioned that the entire series(comics) is based on concept such as post-apocalypse, leadership etc, but it was mentioned that season 2 had crappy writers and could not portray them well.
This makes me curious, does the comic have good writers, that portray this well? Is the conversations there somewhat interesting? I just wanna dodge the high school drama where there is like a tiny ass bit of character development once at the end of each season. When I talk about drama, I actually mean meaningless talk where nothing is faced, only avoided (blamings, shouting etc). Its okey if the position they are in seems impossible, but if its bullshit like Rick cant talk to Lori cause he has some Shane issues, then fuck this show right up in its ass. So far, Rick has changed, but if it takes the writers an entire season to make a tweak in character development, then good bye TWD. (already stopped watching Dexter, so much bullshit, season 1-2 was good, rest was a true waste of time.)
Sorry if this feeled like a rant, just had it with poor writers that cant write cause the dollarsign is blocking their perspective and vision.
|
On October 16 2012 11:21 LoLAdriankat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 11:13 slyboogie wrote:
This is probably the best episode since the amazing series premiere. I'm glad they got away from all the existential bull shit for a bit. Yeah we get it, life is hard in a post-apocalyptic zombie and humans will struggle with concepts of leadership, humanity, decency, blah blah blah. The Walking Dead never did this kind of stuff well though. It was always hamfisted and wooden. What they do well is Zombies. Also, killing Zombies. I enjoyed this hour. Tagged for spoilers (comic related) just to be safe. + Show Spoiler +The Walking Dead comics are all about the concepts you listed. The problem was that the writers in season 2 sucked major ass so they couldn't get it right as the writing was so contrived and bad.
So yeah, themes of leadership and morality are going to come up sooner or later, especially with the new prisoners coming up as well as The Governor.
I've never read the comic, but I have really only heard good things about it.
However, and people will disagree with me, fans of the comic should not come to the show with the same expectations. Comics are a different medium from television. Where one scene might be taut and provoking in a comic, when adapted as poorly as it is on The Walking Dead, it become tiresome and eye-rolling-ly bad on television.
I try not to comment on this show too much - since like Game of Thrones, it has very rabid fans with very intense opinions. But I think it's been trying to be something it wasn't for too long. It was trying to be it's source material when some where along the process, someone didn't have the chops to pull it off.
Anyways, whenever the show focuses on "surviving the zombie Apocalypse," side of it's existence, it tends to succeed: Series premiere, Zombie attack at the camp ground in season 1, Season 2 premiere scene on the freeway. Where it gets bad is when it reaches for the philosophical well: Vatos, Fort Benning, every scene on the farm discussing humanity.
You say that this issue is coming back up. Hopefully, they can do it with some grace. Or while killing zombies with machetes.
|
On October 16 2012 19:39 crappen wrote:
Someone mentioned that the entire series(comics) is based on concept such as post-apocalypse, leadership etc, but it was mentioned that season 2 had crappy writers and could not portray them well.
This makes me curious, does the comic have good writers, that portray this well?
Kirkman does a pretty good job at focusing on the human element in the comics. Zombies pretty much take a back seat and are just there. Sure they cause the death of very many characters and are always a threat, but the bigger threat is clearly the individuals themselves and the mental toll of living in such a world. If you do decide to start reading the comics, (which I strongly suggest, even if you just torrent the first volume to see if you like it) start from the beginning because the TV and Comic stories are totally different.
On October 17 2012 01:42 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 11:21 LoLAdriankat wrote:On October 16 2012 11:13 slyboogie wrote:
This is probably the best episode since the amazing series premiere. I'm glad they got away from all the existential bull shit for a bit. Yeah we get it, life is hard in a post-apocalyptic zombie and humans will struggle with concepts of leadership, humanity, decency, blah blah blah. The Walking Dead never did this kind of stuff well though. It was always hamfisted and wooden. What they do well is Zombies. Also, killing Zombies. I enjoyed this hour. Tagged for spoilers (comic related) just to be safe. + Show Spoiler +The Walking Dead comics are all about the concepts you listed. The problem was that the writers in season 2 sucked major ass so they couldn't get it right as the writing was so contrived and bad.
So yeah, themes of leadership and morality are going to come up sooner or later, especially with the new prisoners coming up as well as The Governor. I've never read the comic, but I have really only heard good things about it. However, and people will disagree with me, fans of the comic should not come to the show with the same expectations. Comics are a different medium from television. Where one scene might be taut and provoking in a comic, when adapted as poorly as it is on The Walking Dead, it become tiresome and eye-rolling-ly bad on television. I try not to comment on this show too much - since like Game of Thrones, it has very rabid fans with very intense opinions. But I think it's been trying to be something it wasn't for too long. It was trying to be it's source material when some where along the process, someone didn't have the chops to pull it off. Anyways, whenever the show focuses on "surviving the zombie Apocalypse," side of it's existence, it tends to succeed: Series premiere, Zombie attack at the camp ground in season 1, Season 2 premiere scene on the freeway. Where it gets bad is when it reaches for the philosophical well: Vatos, Fort Benning, every scene on the farm discussing humanity. You say that this issue is coming back up. Hopefully, they can do it with some grace. Or while killing zombies with machetes.
Actually, the problem was that it strayed TOO FAR from the source material but then also tried to keep the same message and type of events. This caused the writers to fabricate some original material that just didn't work. This season appears to be getting back on track, so it has a chance to actually be pretty good.
|
United States13896 Posts
On October 16 2012 19:39 crappen wrote:
Someone mentioned that the entire series(comics) is based on concept such as post-apocalypse, leadership etc, but it was mentioned that season 2 had crappy writers and could not portray them well.
This makes me curious, does the comic have good writers, that portray this well? Is the conversations there somewhat interesting? I just wanna dodge the high school drama where there is like a tiny ass bit of character development once at the end of each season. When I talk about drama, I actually mean meaningless talk where nothing is faced, only avoided (blamings, shouting etc). Its okey if the position they are in seems impossible, but if its bullshit like Rick cant talk to Lori cause he has some Shane issues, then fuck this show right up in its ass. So far, Rick has changed, but if it takes the writers an entire season to make a tweak in character development, then good bye TWD. (already stopped watching Dexter, so much bullshit, season 1-2 was good, rest was a true waste of time.)
Sorry if this feeled like a rant, just had it with poor writers that cant write cause the dollarsign is blocking their perspective and vision.
Without getting into too much detail, the comic is much better in all respects, including themes of leadership, coping in their new world, and just individual relationships. Dialogue is practical without becoming tedious, characters are more developed, and conflict is more believable and rarely feels contrived.
|
Part of why I believe they made up characters like daryl, merle, and tdog, as well as changed a lot of the story was due to it being on tv. While american tv has often shown violence and alluded to sex, we're normally pretty censored as a whole. I highly doubt common themes in the comic such as rape and cannibalism will even be mentioned. And that means drastically shifting the story away from what the comic was like, which had a lot of just atrocious shit happen to the group on a regular basis. Seriously, the only reason you wouldn't have someone as incredibly badass as tyreese would be because of just how brutal he can get and what happened with his small group that joined rick... >_>
|
On October 16 2012 12:39 Bearhammer wrote:
I don't know if this is explained in the book but the one thing that kinda bothers me is the lady with the two "pet" zombies. She cut of their arms and jaws so they can't bite or grab her, essentially reducing here chance of infection by those zombies and she keeps them around as "pets" so they mask her sent in return. Ok I can roll with that. Why on earth though do the zombies act like a domesticated dogs. They just stand there obediently with absolutely no desire to trying to attack her. Cutting off a zombies arms and lower jaw doesn't mean that you removed their basic instinct to attack, maul and eat living humans, even if they are in a state where they practically speaking, they can't.
-Note: This is not meant to be a hate comment on walking dead I love the show but like all shows I love I like it best when they are as believable as possible. Which means having some consistency in things like zombie behavior. Any ideas as to why this is?
+ Show Spoiler +the zombies are i think her boyfriend and her brother
|
My guess on the pet zombies just from watching the TV show so no spoilers just a guess is that they are her siblings, as they were both black and she keeps them with her while traveling, or possibly they are just pack mules.
and no i don't think all black people are related : /
|
I think they're just packmules, seems pretty handy not having to carry loads of stuff yourself.
|
On October 17 2012 07:03 buickskylark wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 12:39 Bearhammer wrote:
I don't know if this is explained in the book but the one thing that kinda bothers me is the lady with the two "pet" zombies. She cut of their arms and jaws so they can't bite or grab her, essentially reducing here chance of infection by those zombies and she keeps them around as "pets" so they mask her sent in return. Ok I can roll with that. Why on earth though do the zombies act like a domesticated dogs. They just stand there obediently with absolutely no desire to trying to attack her. Cutting off a zombies arms and lower jaw doesn't mean that you removed their basic instinct to attack, maul and eat living humans, even if they are in a state where they practically speaking, they can't.
-Note: This is not meant to be a hate comment on walking dead I love the show but like all shows I love I like it best when they are as believable as possible. Which means having some consistency in things like zombie behavior. Any ideas as to why this is? + Show Spoiler +the zombies are i think her boyfriend and her brother
+ Show Spoiler +http://walkingdead.wikia.com/wiki/Michonne%27s_Story
It's her boyfriend and his best friend.
|
On October 17 2012 07:03 buickskylark wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 12:39 Bearhammer wrote:
I don't know if this is explained in the book but the one thing that kinda bothers me is the lady with the two "pet" zombies. She cut of their arms and jaws so they can't bite or grab her, essentially reducing here chance of infection by those zombies and she keeps them around as "pets" so they mask her sent in return. Ok I can roll with that. Why on earth though do the zombies act like a domesticated dogs. They just stand there obediently with absolutely no desire to trying to attack her. Cutting off a zombies arms and lower jaw doesn't mean that you removed their basic instinct to attack, maul and eat living humans, even if they are in a state where they practically speaking, they can't.
-Note: This is not meant to be a hate comment on walking dead I love the show but like all shows I love I like it best when they are as believable as possible. Which means having some consistency in things like zombie behavior. Any ideas as to why this is? + Show Spoiler +the zombies are i think her boyfriend and her brother
edit: poster above me just answered.
|
United States13896 Posts
On October 17 2012 07:00 BlackPaladin wrote:Part of why I believe they made up characters like daryl, merle, and tdog, as well as changed a lot of the story was due to it being on tv. While american tv has often shown violence and alluded to sex, we're normally pretty censored as a whole. + Show Spoiler [Comic stuff possible spoiler] +I highly doubt common themes in the comic such as rape and cannibalism will even be mentioned. And that means drastically shifting the story away from what the comic was like, which had a lot of just atrocious shit happen to the group on a regular basis. Seriously, the only reason you wouldn't have someone as incredibly badass as tyreese would be because of just how brutal he can get and what happened with his small group that joined rick... >_>
Censorship is not a valid excuse for what they did taking a great black male lead and reducing/replacing that character with such tokenism. This isn't network television, it is 9 pm cable television programming. AMC can and has done some pretty novel stuff in this time slot. There isn't any other reason thus far for T-Dog's existence in this program other than that contrived moment in season 1 where he's confronted with leaving Merle to die or setting him free. That has been the one moment where his character had any kind of depth, feeling, or carried real responsibility in this story. Since then the writers have proved completely incompetent or just outright unwilling to find a way to really make that character tick.
edit: + Show Spoiler [Comic related critique] +And don't tell me rape is off the table. Law & Order: SVU went 14 seasons for christ sake. No cannibalism in a zombie series is also a pretty laughable assertion when you think about it. "Yeah its totally cool if you show undead human beings eating human beings, but if you show living human beings eating human beings THERE'LL BE HELL TO PAY!!!" This stuff can and has been done before in ways that don't draw forth the ire of the FCC.
|
On October 17 2012 16:01 p4NDemik wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2012 07:00 BlackPaladin wrote:Part of why I believe they made up characters like daryl, merle, and tdog, as well as changed a lot of the story was due to it being on tv. While american tv has often shown violence and alluded to sex, we're normally pretty censored as a whole. + Show Spoiler [Comic stuff possible spoiler] +I highly doubt common themes in the comic such as rape and cannibalism will even be mentioned. And that means drastically shifting the story away from what the comic was like, which had a lot of just atrocious shit happen to the group on a regular basis. Seriously, the only reason you wouldn't have someone as incredibly badass as tyreese would be because of just how brutal he can get and what happened with his small group that joined rick... >_> Censorship is not a valid excuse for what they did taking a great black male lead and reducing/replacing that character with such tokenism. This isn't network television, it is 9 pm cable television programming. AMC can and has done some pretty novel stuff in this time slot. There isn't any other reason thus far for T-Dog's existence in this program other than that contrived moment in season 1 where he's confronted with leaving Merle to die or setting him free. That has been the one moment where his character had any kind of depth, feeling, or carried real responsibility in this story. Since then the writers have proved completely incompetent or just outright unwilling to find a way to really make that character tick. edit: + Show Spoiler [Comic related critique] +And don't tell me rape is off the table. Law & Order: SVU went 14 seasons for christ sake. No cannibalism in a zombie series is also a pretty laughable assertion when you think about it. "Yeah its totally cool if you show undead human beings eating human beings, but if you show living human beings eating human beings THERE'LL BE HELL TO PAY!!!" This stuff can and has been done before in ways that don't draw forth the ire of the FCC.
Yeah I agree with you. It just seems so retarded to then get rid of literally one of the most amazing characters for what we got. Daryl is pretty good, but nowhere near as amazing yet, and tdog is....tdog. :/
I have to agree with the other poster that it's just lazy/bad writing then if it wasn't some other stupid reason like censorship or trying to be different than the comic. TWD has a really strong story that can really get you emotionally involved, but season 2 tried to go pretty far from the original material, and it made it sort of bland and made it hard for me to really get such feelings. Even sophie dying just made me go "good thing that bad plot is over," and I'm the type who really gets into a story above all else. >_>
So i'm really looking forward to season 3. They seem to be going back more to source material, and it gave me nerd chills when I watched them start taking the prison so military-like.
|
honestly i love the comic in it's purity, nothing is witheld so the story can be milked further and extended. i don't hold my breathe for amc's adaptation. when season 1 was pretty much summed up in 5 chapters, i knew they were gonna milk the show.
|
i mean it's follie to compare the two, because the two mediums just don't necessarily work the same way. I do admit there have been falters in the tv series, but this is always the case in adaptations to the screen. Overall I think TWD has done a good job portraying their own version of the graphic novels of TWD.
+ Show Spoiler +I do think that in the comics, the way they discover how they are all infected was more brutal, but more driving. Having the two kids kill each other, have tyrese lose his shit, and then have them come back and be like WTF WTF WTF, and have Rick figure it out and have that epic final scene of the volume. "WE are the Walking Dead" when everyone has turned against him as a leader. Beautiful
|
what a fucking gore porno that episode was. instead of chilling on a farm for the majority of last season they all go berserk in this one? and literally all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
