The Walking Dead

Amy characters?

 

oh, I see. part of the difficulty was due, of course, to there only being six episodes in the first season.

But there are plenty of US shows that feature complex character development. Mad Men and The Wire come to mind, both of which have large casts and diverging story lines. So it can be done. Mostly what this comes down to is a matter of taste. I am a character driven consumer. I will watch season two in hopes that there will be more to, uh, sink my teeth into.
--- merged: Oct 12, 2011 3:54 PM ---
one other thought, you had mentioned the 'redneck brothers.' the closest we come, like you had mentioned, to seeing the amount of character development that I like to see is in the brother at the camp. he is responding. not just reacting all the time.

 

Ok, I just finished Episode 5.
What I don't get is,

why they didn't kill Jim instead of letting him off on the side of the road.
I know they said they don't kill the living, but c'mon, he's going to die and become a Walker, then he's out there free to potentially attack other unsuspecting Livers. You'd think they'd be against that.
If they had compunctions against killing a Liver, couldn't they wait till he died, then plugged him with a bolt?

 

I am really looking forward to season 2 as well.

 

I have a question....and a statement and I know I'm new here and all and I don't want folks to think I'm trying to be the boss of anything...sorry long preamble.
In regard to SPOILERS.
I have an opinion. Let's take The Walking Dead.
I would like to be able to talk about stuff that has been broadcast (and heck, now on DVD) without it being considered a spoiler. In truth, a spoiler is information that is shared BEFORE the information is available to the public at large.
In contrast, anything that happens in season 2 of The Walking Dead prior to it's broadcast is unquestionably a spoiler. I know it's hard to get folks to agree on what constitutes a spoiler but if one has put in the time to watch a show, after it has been broadcast, shouldn't it be OK to talk openly about it?
--- merged: Oct 13, 2011 1:40 AM ---

I wondered about that at the time, too. I thought maybe it was being used as a set up for them to meet a 'changed' Jim later but it didn't turn out that way. My only guess is that as Cynthetiq replied, "compassion"--and that by illustrating the compassion that the survivors had at that point in their journey it would serve to underscore what is to come regarding how they deal with one another in their daily struggle to survive the zombie apocalypse.
The guy that wrote the comic books--Robert Kirkman, often says his desire when writing The Walking Dead was to put the humanity of his characters first, examining just how strained it could become. He states further that the zombies are secondary to his story.

 

They don't have compassion for other possible survivors that might run into Jim?
Seems kind of shortsighted and cruel.

Now, I'm off to watch Episode 6 for the first time. (hence the use of spoilers, in case there are slow-ass viewers like myself)

 

I know...I thought it was stupid actually...but my telling the TV screen that did absolutely no good!

I LOVE 'slow-ass viewers' of good shows. I came to a number of them late...as long as you get started some time it's A-OK with me as is anyone's use of the spoiler warning.

Selfishly, I don't wanna get gang-mauled if I forget to use a spoiler warning after a show has been broadcast. I probably won't forget but I write about TV all the time using the same kind of SPOILER warning system that say, EW uses.
I understand the purist POV to remain unspoiled even more so now that I am often spoiled about what is to come on certain shows and when I watch them my enjoyment is somewhat diminished. I do get it and I do respect it...to the point of after-broadcast...and even then I respect other's wishes for me to zip it.

 

It can be seen in a lot of different ways. But as a viewer, I am for one, am happy with how it was handled. Sometimes life is like that.

 

So…? What did you think of the debut season 2 episode of The Walking Dead?

It was great to see the gang back though with the promos showing new faces–someone is going to have to get chomped:

I hope not poor little gone-missing Sophia (Madison Lintz)!
Seriously, with also-a-child Carl (Chandler Riggs) taking a bullet to the torso, they wouldn’t have Sophia get messed up, too, would they? I hope someone from Hershel’s farm found her.

I am really liking how the characters are coming into sharper detail. ‘Rick’ (Andrew Lincoln) really is just a small town Alabama sheriff in way over his head trying to keep his motley crew together–alive together.
I still think Shane (Jon Bernthal) is kind of an ass-monkey, to put it nicely. Could still see having what happened to the character in the comic happen on The Walking Dead, the character is such a macho IDK, I just can’t warm to his poor-me, I-lost-the-girl thing. I mean, man up, find another girl, it is the end of the world!

 

Going to look for the season 2 opener on iTunes. Not fond of paying per episode but I will accept it as the only good choice and know they are worth it.

 

They give you both 702 MB for the standard def video and 1.86 GB for the HD video. Not bad for $2.99

 

What did you guys think of S2 episode 1? Was you mouth on the floor at the end of the episode like mine?

 

I'll be watching Season 2 Episode 1 together with my fiancée when my weekend here begins again (Thursday evening).

So far, we're loving this TV show.

 

Yep. I did not see that coming.

And TWO kids in one episode? Ballsy!