- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #41
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #42
TerryLP
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 56
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #44
TerryLP
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 56
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #46
Agreed!
I cannot wait!
TerryLP
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 56
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #48
Damn was it 90mins long? I never realised lol... I've watched it 3 times now looking for little clues and what not. I like how the tension builds throughout the show. Missing kids signs, lot's of sirens, police chatter and constant buzz of Heli's all made it quite convincing. It's like people knew something very bad was about to happen or was even happening but they didn't know what yet..
Ref:
'Fear the Walking Dead' Sets All-Time Cable Ratings Premiere Record
.
TerryLP
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 56
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #50
Ooh yes! I wonder if they managed to whip the rest of the compound into decent fighters too but I guess there will be the inevitable 'Red shirts ' (a la Star trek) who will be the walker fodder..
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #51
Apparently it's back next week... Damn! Another week to wait..
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #52
TerryLP
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 56
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2005
- Messages
- 8,984
I think its Gabriel since he's caused nothing but trouble and has had a death wish since he was introduced on the show.
TerryLP
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 56
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #56
Maybe the Wolves attacked the camp? (the two guys with 'W' on their foreheads )
Didn't hang about did they? (I mean the writers of the show) We are thrust straight back into this crazy world which they depict so well.. Great episode!
The huge herd of walkers: What would you have done?
Personally I would have made the quarry more secure and then picked the walkers off over a few days.. It's not like they are gonna go anywhere is it? Plus the place is acting like a natural trap funnelling walkers away from the camp. This seems an ideal situation to me. One could visit the quarry on a regular basis just to keep the numbers down. Releasing them imo is like letting loose a wild dog, no control or at least very little. Best made plans of mice and men....
Didn't hang about did they? (I mean the writers of the show) We are thrust straight back into this crazy world which they depict so well.. Great episode!
The huge herd of walkers: What would you have done?
Personally I would have made the quarry more secure and then picked the walkers off over a few days.. It's not like they are gonna go anywhere is it? Plus the place is acting like a natural trap funnelling walkers away from the camp. This seems an ideal situation to me. One could visit the quarry on a regular basis just to keep the numbers down. Releasing them imo is like letting loose a wild dog, no control or at least very little. Best made plans of mice and men....
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #57
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2005
- Messages
- 8,984
By far, it was an excellent episode. So how about the comparisons to "Fear The Walking Dead"? I read something about the ratings for the premier being down from last year, but I think that has a lot to do with a disappointing start to "Fear the Walking Dead", which to me, is a bit lackluster. I would be surprised if that show continues to pull in the audience that "The Walking Dead" does. On "Fear the Walking Dead", I am a bit ambivalent about the characters; one the problem being that we "know what happens" and they don't. Their responses seem scripted and their actions seem a bit far fetched to me, removing suspension of disbelief, which is critical to any good screenplay.
On the original show, we had to use some imagination to try to figure out "how things went down" when the zombie apocalypse happened. FTWD seems to kind of ruin that use of our imagination, although, admittedly it can add for some interesting stories.
However, the backstories of the characters on FTWD don't seem to matter as much to me as Rick and his plight. On The Walking Dead, we have watched Rick have to deal with his best friend betraying him, losing his wife, and encountering this new, ruthless, dystopia. On FTWD, we barely know anything about these people, and little time has been given for character development. The Walking Dead was a surprise success when it started. One thing most viewers may not know is that the creator of the first season of The Walking Dead was not just Robert Kirkman (the guy who wrote the comics). The one who brought it, arguably, to cinematic quality, is a man named Frank Darabont. This guy wrote the screenplay and directed Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile (two highly acclaimed motion pictures). He was heavily involved in the production of Season 1 and possibly half of Season 2 of the original show. He sued AMC for terminating him during Season Two, or something like that, but all episodes of the show were not just originated by the guy who wrote the comic book. So this is very interesting to me, as I considered the first and last episodes of Season 1 to be among the best of the series (I liked Season 1 a lot, this was something we never saw before on television).
There is a very interesting article about Darabont here.
As far as the latest episode, we saw some heavy action. This may be the best episode in a very long time and I thoroughly enjoyed it. However, I still find myself wanting to know more, and some legitimate holes in the story, I think are present:
If you were in the zombie apocalypse, what is so special about your group that you have not turned into a total savage like the cannibals and murderers we see all the time? Just because civilization has broken down, why is it heavily implied that the survivors would have either turned into naive appeasers or murderous lunatics?
If you were in "Alexandria Safe Zone" (presumably on the outskirts of Washington, DC), wouldn't you at least inquire, to others, about the existence of the federal government at the White House and Capitol Building, as well as the whether or not the government may still be functioning on some level from a fallback location? In real life, the government would probably survive the zombie apocalypse, even in "The Walking Dead" conditions, simply because there is a continuity of government plan.
The leader of Alexandria is an enigma. Why was she filming people who joined the group last season? Why would they leave a United States senator in a gated community with a bunch of civilians and make them build their own wall? Huh?
If you realized thousands of zombies are coming towards your community, wouldn't you just become a permanent migrant until the zombies deteriorate? It looks like in The Walking Dead universe, it will take a few generations for humanity to overcome this obstacle. Even then, most post-industrial knowledge would be lost. Agrarian culture (farming, share cropping, feudalism) would probably arise again.
Again, the need to always have a dilemma, or adversary, is weighing the show down. Even though all law and order has broken down, and there is a state of anarchy, what about rational people who are willing to do what it takes to survive and rebuild? Would that many people really become sinister? This brings up a very famous philosophical question of whether or not people are innately "bad, good, or neither".
Ultimately, these are some questions that the horror genre of television has always brought to the screen, in subtle ways, much like a show like "Star Trek", when it was on the air, had a theme of promoting a positive view of the future. That show, like many science fiction series, used fiction as a way of addressing cultural and social issues by putting characters in a future-world in a dilemma that can be used as an allegory to our real lives.
If I was in a zombie apocalypse, I know what I would do. I would die!
On the original show, we had to use some imagination to try to figure out "how things went down" when the zombie apocalypse happened. FTWD seems to kind of ruin that use of our imagination, although, admittedly it can add for some interesting stories.
However, the backstories of the characters on FTWD don't seem to matter as much to me as Rick and his plight. On The Walking Dead, we have watched Rick have to deal with his best friend betraying him, losing his wife, and encountering this new, ruthless, dystopia. On FTWD, we barely know anything about these people, and little time has been given for character development. The Walking Dead was a surprise success when it started. One thing most viewers may not know is that the creator of the first season of The Walking Dead was not just Robert Kirkman (the guy who wrote the comics). The one who brought it, arguably, to cinematic quality, is a man named Frank Darabont. This guy wrote the screenplay and directed Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile (two highly acclaimed motion pictures). He was heavily involved in the production of Season 1 and possibly half of Season 2 of the original show. He sued AMC for terminating him during Season Two, or something like that, but all episodes of the show were not just originated by the guy who wrote the comic book. So this is very interesting to me, as I considered the first and last episodes of Season 1 to be among the best of the series (I liked Season 1 a lot, this was something we never saw before on television).
There is a very interesting article about Darabont here.
As far as the latest episode, we saw some heavy action. This may be the best episode in a very long time and I thoroughly enjoyed it. However, I still find myself wanting to know more, and some legitimate holes in the story, I think are present:
If you were in the zombie apocalypse, what is so special about your group that you have not turned into a total savage like the cannibals and murderers we see all the time? Just because civilization has broken down, why is it heavily implied that the survivors would have either turned into naive appeasers or murderous lunatics?
If you were in "Alexandria Safe Zone" (presumably on the outskirts of Washington, DC), wouldn't you at least inquire, to others, about the existence of the federal government at the White House and Capitol Building, as well as the whether or not the government may still be functioning on some level from a fallback location? In real life, the government would probably survive the zombie apocalypse, even in "The Walking Dead" conditions, simply because there is a continuity of government plan.
The leader of Alexandria is an enigma. Why was she filming people who joined the group last season? Why would they leave a United States senator in a gated community with a bunch of civilians and make them build their own wall? Huh?
If you realized thousands of zombies are coming towards your community, wouldn't you just become a permanent migrant until the zombies deteriorate? It looks like in The Walking Dead universe, it will take a few generations for humanity to overcome this obstacle. Even then, most post-industrial knowledge would be lost. Agrarian culture (farming, share cropping, feudalism) would probably arise again.
Again, the need to always have a dilemma, or adversary, is weighing the show down. Even though all law and order has broken down, and there is a state of anarchy, what about rational people who are willing to do what it takes to survive and rebuild? Would that many people really become sinister? This brings up a very famous philosophical question of whether or not people are innately "bad, good, or neither".
Ultimately, these are some questions that the horror genre of television has always brought to the screen, in subtle ways, much like a show like "Star Trek", when it was on the air, had a theme of promoting a positive view of the future. That show, like many science fiction series, used fiction as a way of addressing cultural and social issues by putting characters in a future-world in a dilemma that can be used as an allegory to our real lives.
If I was in a zombie apocalypse, I know what I would do. I would die!
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #59
Dude you aught to see how these idiots fight on Black Friday for bargains let alone a zombie apocalypse...
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 36,156
- Thread Author
- #60
When it happened I just sat opened mouthed.. Shocking stuff. Wait until you see last nights episode.
I cannot believe they killed Glen off. The other guy deserved it for sure but Glen no way.. Oh well, looks like some other cast members could be going the same way as the shit has really hit the fan.
Similar threads
