EPT"Oh, so you were hiding a corral full of zombies and a zoo of human heads, you pitted my friend in a fight to the death, and now you're telling me we were nothing more than just a fling. Let me help you out, honey!"
[TV] The Walking Dead - Page 295
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
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. | ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
"Oh, so you were hiding a corral full of zombies and a zoo of human heads, you pitted my friend in a fight to the death, and now you're telling me we were nothing more than just a fling. Let me help you out, honey!" | ||
|
LoLAdriankat
United States4307 Posts
| ||
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
On February 11 2013 16:55 Cel.erity wrote: My god, Andrea has got to be the least likable character in the history of television. I swear these writers have never even met a woman in real life. "Oh, so you were hiding a corral full of zombies and a zoo of human heads, you pitted my friend in a fight to the death, and now you're telling me we were nothing more than just a fling. Let me help you out, honey!" andrea could be killed off next episode and I wouldn't care, but I have to say that andrea being a person who easily imprints on others and seeks out relationships or companionship isn't exactly a new theme. we have: - her sister (did she have a name) - dale - shane - michonne - the governor most of these relationships have done essentially nothing to reveal her character as being other than a vampire who battens on people and tries to control them or make them acknowledge her, but whether this is great or awful writing, it's fairly consistent. actually, given that pedigree michonne and the governor might want to watch the fuck out... | ||
|
Skoe420
United States44 Posts
On February 11 2013 15:15 Eishi_Ki wrote: What the fuck was the Beth-Rick thing happening? Surely not If you mean the kiss,I think more than anything she was just relieved that he saved and brought back her sister.I mean Herschel was right there when it happened, so if he thought anything of it he would have said something. Besides I think the two kids like each other more than anyone else.We know Carl has the hots for her in the episode where they both wanted to sleep in the same cell, but Herschel wasn't having any of that. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
I cannot agree with lots of people here, especially about the episode we just got served. Besides that laughable speech of Andria I pretty much think the episode was a good start towards the end. Daryl and Merle were always together, they stick together and even considering his brother is a dick he'll not just leave him hanging, it goes against what he believes in. If asked beforehand, I guess everyone would have agreed that if it comes down to a situation like that, a more drastical event has to happen for Daryl to think of betraying or leaving his brother. If I saw it correctly, we'll see that in the next episode. Overall I didn't like the governor scenes/the town scenes but I did like the prison scenes. Two of the other group already making plans or thinking about screwing the others, survival of the fittest while Tyreese is like; what the hell guys. When Rick is outside on the killing field, it kind of feels like he has less stress. As soon as he gets back into prison already being pissed about Daryl I guess, he has the next problem at hand. First, his baby starts crying when he holds her and probably makes him feel powerless and not-wanted and on the other hand he has the next problem with Tyreeses group. I think people are too fast to judge about certain things, ofcourse TWD is not perfect by any means but what show is? If you want, you can pick apart any show and I for my part, really like it without blindly defending it. I like the few flaws in behaviour there are, its not completely reasonable but look at the fucking mess they are in. Some people seem to think its all rainbows and butterflies there. | ||
|
seansye
United States1722 Posts
BTW Carol seemed like she was about to jump on the closest guy available. If you've read the comics, you'll prob know what I mean. | ||
|
Chrispy
Canada5878 Posts
I don't know, I was stoked for this episode and I thought season 3 has been stellar so far but damn, zzzzz. | ||
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
On February 11 2013 18:08 Type|NarutO wrote: I like the few flaws in behaviour there are, its not completely reasonable but look at the fucking mess they are in. Some people seem to think its all rainbows and butterflies there. it's not the "flaws in behavior" that get people whining, it's that some problem characters simply are not deep enough or written well enough to carry the burden of having to play the imperfect survivor or the devil's advocate without coming off as unlikable, stupid shrews re: lori and andrea. if you're going to have naysayers in the zombie apocalypse, providing the fairly important role of past-world sanity and general buzzkilling to keep the tone grounded, they need to be less like lori and more like dale in that the former has no reasoning for her actions ("whatever you want to do rick, i'm the good, quiet woman...") and the latter had his convictions in a just society and something approximating due process even when the situation warranted more cynicism. better writing could have made lori bearable or plausible, it never came along and andrea is pretty far gone at this point too. the show also has serious problems with pacing in both episodic and seasonal format re: this episode and season 2. it really doesn't mean I hate this show when I mention these criticisms, buuuuuut I will say that it's in style to knock TWD because it's on AMC and has some distinguished peers that it can't measure up to. also, talking dead has either the worst concept, execution or both anyone could possibly imagine. On February 11 2013 18:27 Chrispy wrote: Wow. After watching two seasons of Spartacus back to back I was blown away by how god damned boring this show is. Holy shit this episode was lame. Spartacus and TWD are both action/drama imo, except they're on completely opposite sides. TWD is like 80% drama, 20% action while Spartacaus is 80% action, 20% drama and holy shit Spartacus is way more entertaining. I don't know, I was stoked for this episode and I thought season 3 has been stellar so far but damn, zzzzz. I spent a few minutes thinking about it and I think spartacus may well manage to have the better characters and more consistent entertainment at this point. I have to assume this is by virtue of the way TWD is adopting the comic, but at some point it has to come back around to the source material. at least spartacus knows it's pulp. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On February 11 2013 18:28 TheExile19 wrote: the show also has serious problems with pacing in both episodic and seasonal format re: this episode and season 2. This is a subjective statement. Your opinion doesn't turn into a fact because lots of people agree. Season 2 was slow, I'll give you that but it wasn't uninteresting which ofcourse is my opinion. People need to understand that different taste results in different feelings, but if you want to put an analytical view on a series like TWD, you better stay objective. I completely disagree, that the episode we just had was slow paced, I think it was pretty much stuff to actually put into 1 episode, a lot of different things especially. Also, as bad as it might sound for someone, I kind of enjoy a bit of talk and conversation if its not dull and get you nowhere, where you once again obviously have a point with Season 2. Season 2 had a lot of talk that in the end did lead to nothing, yet most of the time I feel the dialogues are good and within reason. Out of curiosity, people that call TWD "the talking dead" , do you guys enjoy game of thrones? Because GoT is more about conversation and politics and not so much about action. Obviously I don't dare to say characters in TWD are nearly as deep as in GoT, but some people make them sound like they have no depth at all which is untrue for most of them. | ||
|
Chrispy
Canada5878 Posts
Like for example I can't even recall crossbow guy's name at this moment and he's the only character I actually like in this show. Surely it's because it's 2 am and I haven't seen the show much as of late but still, I think it says something. TWD definitely has its moments which completely astound me and I'm sure there are going to be some amazing things to come so I'll continue watching it. But please, no more horrible speeches. ^^ I think you have something confused. There is a seperate show that comes on after TWD calling "The Talking Dead" where some dude talks about The Walking Dead. | ||
|
seansye
United States1722 Posts
On February 11 2013 18:37 Type|NarutO wrote: Out of curiosity, people that call TWD "the talking dead" , do you guys enjoy game of thrones? Because GoT is more about conversation and politics and not so much about action. Obviously I don't dare to say characters in TWD are nearly as deep as in GoT, but some people make them sound like they have no depth at all which is untrue for most of them. It is all about preferences. TWD is about zombies in a post apocalyptic world and GoT is a fantasy world with medieval elements. Completely different if you ask me although both shows seem to attract the same fans. It also depends if you have read the book sor not for GoT. The books are tons better than the show will ever be because there is so much more details than the show can actually fit, especially with the amount of characters that are in the series. Same goes for the guy who posted below me about Spartacus. It seems like he favors action way more than whatever The Walking Dead may be. There's a bit of irony there because as everyone has been alluding to, season 3 of TWD has a lot more action than season 2. I loved Spartacus season 1 and Gannicus' story, but that show went downhill for me after Bartiatus was gone, the death of main guy who played Spartacus, and the show started showing more dicks in season 3. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
Well I guess you cannot argue about taste, if someone is attracted by action, ofcourse he'll prefer Spartacus, but someone attracted to action might also dislike GoT. I for my part do enjoy it, all I can say | ||
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
On February 11 2013 18:37 Type|NarutO wrote: This is a subjective statement. Your opinion doesn't turn into a fact because lots of people agree. Season 2 was slow, I'll give you that but it wasn't uninteresting which ofcourse is my opinion. People need to understand that different taste results in different feelings, but if you want to put an analytical view on a series like TWD, you better stay objective. do I really have to state outright that this is my opinion? objective analysis is impossible when it comes to media, which you seem to know, so why am I the one throwing facts around? that said, poor pacing is fairly objective and generally a province of screenwriting and film studies. I enjoyed season 2 to an extent while having an idea of where things were not necessarily working out or paying off; again, criticism and enjoyment are perfectly capable of coexistence. I completely disagree, that the episode we just had was slow paced, I think it was pretty much stuff to actually put into 1 episode, a lot of different things especially. Also, as bad as it might sound for someone, I kind of enjoy a bit of talk and conversation if its not dull and get you nowhere, where you once again obviously have a point with Season 2. Season 2 had a lot of talk that in the end did lead to nothing, yet most of the time I feel the dialogues are good and within reason. the bolded free floating passive-aggressiveness is really obnoxious, I have to say. okay, but what's "good and within reason"? this isn't a period piece approximating the tedium of a zombie apocalypse with real people, it's a piece of dramatic fiction with zombies in it. I don't want conversations with the main characters of any show I'm watching to be as rote as the ones you occasionally get in TWD, especially in season 2. I didn't find this episode to be particularly bad in that respect, mostly because of carol and herschel's talks, but the main narrative established by the rest of the season is rick vs. the governor. we got that for 10 minutes and the rest of the 50 were temporary resolutions to every single character subplot, like they were checking off a list. tyreese's group? check. glenn/maggie fallout? check. (this one was a real DOA; I didn't empathize with glenn much at all) daryl/merle? check. the worst part may well be that the only development generating any tension at all was ghost lori forcing rick to explode all over tyreese; otherwise, what happened to any other character that doesn't have plot armor for the next few episodes coughdarylcough? all this would be okay if there was any coherent thread between most of these relationships, but there really isn't. TWD isn't really about anything and doesn't really have a coherent theme, so when I watch breaking bad and then jump ship to TWD in the downtime, with all the acclaim it gets, there's just a huge drop-off. sorry, I'm not pretending it's a fair comparison, but seriously, TWD is a cultural tour de force and we should expect more from it. edit: it's not about action vs. talking, it's about effective action (or cathartic action) vs. empty action. TWD has empty action almost all the time simply by way of how no zombie has any sort of vendetta or reason for attacking someone other than hunger; this is also why season 3 was so refreshing, because the show was proving itself terribly deficient in delivering character drama other than rick vs. shane, and so when the governor came along it salvaged a floundering narrative. spartacus has the overarching structure of powerful vs. powerless, and breaking bad has such good character drama and relationships via writing that it needs almost no help from any overall theme. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
I've watch nearly all, if not all of the big series, sometimes in German as well as in English and while you are correct and within reason to say its a matter of taste, objective statements can only be made in certain aspects. One example would be Acting, another one filming etc. I enjoy breaking bad but in what world would I compare those two, especially calling out the relations between characters. While Breaking Bad is an outstanding series, it is a lot simpler to write, I dare to say. You have steady progress of one character turning into something he didn't want to be in the first place but enjoying it while getting there, at least from time to time. While obviously no one can say there is no thought behind BB, no one should deny that setting up bonds between a few/fewer characters is more simple than between a group or groups even, especially if you have to get rid of people from time to time. The Breaking Bad really doesn't have that kind of problem, won't you agree on that? How many important people did die there? Not so much if you ask me. I don't think TWD does right in every part of its show, but seeing as how complex it is, I am a bit more careful with my criticism especially within a season. Did every episode of Breaking Bad make sense from start to finish or left you with a good feeling? For example S03E10 'The Fly' it has a deeper meaning to it, but getting a grasp on it on the first hand is what you need to do. No one will simply go in there and say "ah yeah man! I knew the meaning from the start", because you have to put some thought into it. While I agree that some conversations seem rote which is obviously bad, I'd point out that conversations getting us NOWHERE are not as bad as people make it sound. In a post apocalyptic scenario you sometimes go nowhere by your discussion. Don't you ever stumble upon a point in your life having a discussion, where you end up running in circles? That does happen in TWD, if it happens too much, maybe, but thats up to yourself to judge. I personally don't dislike it that much. About your criticism that TWD seems jumpy from time to time (needing to feature all the groups and subplots) I tend to agree, I'd rather see less subplots or just not explain everything in detail as they don't have time for that. To me it seems they want to write out as much as possible, leaving nothing to actually think about while they could use time that gets stolen by very unimportant conversations to have deeper characters and conversations. Edit: I can kind of feel with Glenn. If someone would treat my girlfriend in the ways the governor did, I'd go mad as well. I think his anger and frustration is completely reasonable and to be honest, the reason why Rick didn't shoot the governor is not there at all. The governor is a potential and actual thread that could have been eliminated there. To Glenn, its nothing more but revenge and I can perfectly relate. Edit2: I agree on the empty action part. Even though I enjoy the action, the action in TWD feels like they put it in to have it, not because its needed. | ||
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
On February 11 2013 19:31 Type|NarutO wrote: First of all I don't know how a statement that simply put says 'I enjoy something while others might find it not entertaining at all' is called out as passiv-aggressive. I dare to say you go way over the top calling it out as obnoxious even. *shrug* While I agree that some conversations seem rote which is obviously bad, I'd point out that conversations getting us NOWHERE are not as bad as people make it sound. In a post apocalyptic scenario you sometimes go nowhere by your discussion. Don't you ever stumble upon a point in your life having a discussion, where you end up running in circles? That does happen in TWD, if it happens too much, maybe, but thats up to yourself to judge. I personally don't dislike it that much. I have to stress that this idea, that the way rote conversations are rote is reflective of the tedium and circular nature of real people, is itself somewhat circular and simply does not belong in high drama like the ones AMC delivers. I was going to reference BB again, but I feel it's simpler to just say that I don't want my escapism to be relatable to me in that these people on my television could literally be my neighbors. I understand the somewhat communitarian nature of a zombie apocalypse in that initial survival is somewhat random and joe schmoes can end up in a group where they get to survive, and be dumb, but that role is fulfilled by the countless number of people from season 1's initial group up until now that were utterly forgettable and were zombified quickly. this show which purports to be about survival should depict an apocalypse that elevates survival to such a form that it elevates the characters as well; no characters should be boring, and if they're going to be, make that their defining character trait and make it useful to the narrative. the only person I can think of on TWD that fits that archetype is that naive guy with the science lab in woodbury, and he's less boring than he is naive, even though his lines suck and often he can be boring, which is my belabored point. when your main supporting characters like glenn and daryl, who are defined as being proactive, smart and intense, are occasionally boring, the writing has failed and you cannot salvage it by saying that it's indicative of that they were once normal people. I'm not watching this show for normal people, which is why lori suuuuuuuuuucks. Edit: I can kind of feel with Glenn. If someone would treat my girlfriend in the ways the governor did, I'd go mad as well. I think his anger and frustration is completely reasonable and to be honest, the reason why Rick didn't shoot the governor is not there at all. The governor is a potential and actual thread that could have been eliminated there. To Glenn, its nothing more but revenge and I can perfectly relate. the thing is that maggie is handling it much better than glenn and she was the one who it happened to. it becomes more about glenn's feelings of impotence and frustration than any sense of revenge, and I don't really feel it helps or necessarily fits his character to lash out at rick. this is more subjective than any other opinion I've had here though, and there's an easy argument to be made about how it humanizes him, even though I don't feel his character arc is in a position where it needs to be clear that glenn is human. bedtime, maybe I'll feel better about this episode after some college tedium. | ||
|
Mogwai
United States13274 Posts
On February 11 2013 18:51 Chrispy wrote: @Exile I agree. Spartacus is not without its flaws but I totally feel more invested/interested in the characters in it than I do with TWD, despite even the tragic death of the actor playing the central character. And that is something I really would not expect... a show like Spartacus, which at first glance appears to be a cheap knock off of 300/Rome/Gladiator I would rate over TWD. Like for example I can't even recall crossbow guy's name at this moment and he's the only character I actually like in this show. Surely it's because it's 2 am and I haven't seen the show much as of late but still, I think it says something. TWD definitely has its moments which completely astound me and I'm sure there are going to be some amazing things to come so I'll continue watching it. But please, no more horrible speeches. ^^ I think you have something confused. There is a seperate show that comes on after TWD calling "The Talking Dead" where some dude talks about The Walking Dead. Oh god, the dialog in this episode was PAINFUL. Jesus Christ, play to your strengths guys... kill zombies, don't write retarded speeches where characters say nonsensical shit and then everyone just goes along with it. | ||
|
frantic.cactus
New Zealand164 Posts
I believe that the story is solid and not horribly written, and that the dichotomy between action and interpersonal scenes is solid enough to keep my interest as well drive each episode forward at an acceptable pace. I am a big fan of the show and am very pleased with each season so far. Come on TWD fans, speak out and don't let this thread descend into an overly critical abyss. | ||
|
purecarnagge
719 Posts
Michonne has been so underdeveloped to this point in time... They really need to hit on that next episode or I feel the true potential of Michonne won't be realized. Andrea needs to have a plot event other than sleeping with the govenor and if she's just passing through then she should have left and gone back to the group. Also, what happened to badass andrea from the comics that was going to shoot people and be a real assset to the group? You know the one shaned how to shoot and was awesome in that subdivision scene from season 2. Just saying... Rick is going to be crazy for the entire season. I think its going to be interesting... Carol gets to hook up with the serial killer now how cool is that? (creepy) two guys who wanted to take control of the prison from Tyrese's group are going to end up dead by end of the season. Actual episode bets should take place later. Talking dead: First time watching it in awhile, recap of all the dead was funny. | ||
|
MiQ
Canada312 Posts
| ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
Tyreese is pretty cool so far, i hope he stays. | ||
| ||
