The Walking Dead Season 2 (AMC) - Page 8

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

Topic:  The writing on TWD is objectively atrocious and has not improved much since the first season.  Discuss.

 

Topic:  The editing on TWD is clunky and disjoints storylines to the detriment of pacing.  Discuss.

 

Topic:  The acting by various members of our survivors, Sarah Wayne Callies(Lori) in particular and to a lesser extent Laurie Holden(Andrea), is dragging down an otherwise tenable cast.  Or, is the writing so freshman that the actors are hamstrung by the words put in their mouths?  Discuss.

I think it's the writing that's the core problem. Too little is happening, and too much stupidity by the characters, who don't seem to learn much as they go. I haven't read the comic/GN, so I'm wondering if fidelity to the source material is a problem here, as I've read a lot of negative reactions to Kirkman's writing. It just seems like they're not mining the premise for all its worth, and they're dragging things out that could (and like should) be resolved more quickly. Or, if they're going to keep Sophia missing, let's do more with the mom and the effects of a missing child in the zombie apocalypse.

The acting is good, given the scripts the actors have to work with. Callies, I think, is the more limited talent, but I think both she and Holden are doing fine. My eyerolling and impatience doesn't come from not buying them as their characters, but from the dialogue and plotting. The writing of the show feels like the writers and producers simply don't know where to go next, and are floundering and using worn devices to increase tension and stretch out the timing.

I almost think the show would have been better if it had been anthology-style, following disparate survivors and what happens to them, with their paths crossing occasionally or working towards a bigger, unified plot.

1) I'm suprised it took THIS long for someone to pull a Shane. 90% of the group is made up of self-absorbed assholes, that I wasn't shocked one of them finally sacrificed another to get away.

2) I don't get why Daryl going through the woods at night is dumb? If there's anyone who has proven themselves capable of handling shit, it's Daryl. His only mistake was taking a whiny, talky blonde with him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 

 

I almost think the show would have been better if it had been anthology-style, following disparate survivors and what happens to them, with their paths crossing occasionally or working towards a bigger, unified plot.

 

Having introduced two people to Trick R Treat this year I could totally go for a weaving-in-and-out anthology like that with this premise.

And about the night walk, with the Glenn nookie plot developing was I the only one thinking Andrea and Daryl were gonna knock boots?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamnDirtyApe 

2) I don't get why Daryl going through the woods at night is dumb? If there's anyone who has proven themselves capable of handling shit, it's Daryl. His only mistake was taking a whiny, talky blonde with him.

Because it's night (when walkers are more active), because they're far from help, because only Daryl really knows how to use a weapon, because because because. Going alone would've helped him a bit, tactically, but still would have been stupid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

And about the night walk, with the Glenn nookie plot developing was I the only one thinking Andrea and Daryl were gonna knock boots?

 

I didn't think they would during this episode, but I could see the show building towards them doing it at some point.

Bonding over a lost sibling. The two-dimensional romance writes itself!

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

Michael hints above at the glaring hole in Sebastian's argument about nitpicking; that being that the show has dug itself so far into a hole that it has to pull an Andy Dufresne at this point just to become mediocre.

 

I agree the power at the farmhouse kinda made me cock my head to the side for a second but beyond that I simply think I didn't care to argue about it because this episode finally became barely tolerable.  That barely tolerable rise is quality led me to overlook a few things that I gather might be explained later on.

 

If Sebastian wants to talk fundamental issues besides "gotchas" that's fine.

 

Topic:  The writing on TWD is objectively atrocious and has not improved much since the first season.  Discuss.

 

Topic:  The editing on TWD is clunky and disjoints storylines to the detriment of pacing.  Discuss.

 

Topic:  The acting by various members of our survivors, Sarah Wayne Callies(Lori) in particular and to a lesser extent Laurie Holden(Andrea), is dragging down an otherwise tenable cast.  Or, is the writing so freshman that the actors are hamstrung by the words put in their mouths?  Discuss.

Topic:  If every little thing the show does, annoys the fuck out of you, why do you still watch it?  Discuss

I'm all for discussing elements of the show that work, or don't work for me... but if I found myself just insulting the show over and over again, and basically hating it, I guess I wouldn't watch it anymore. There is 24 hours in a day, not going to waste 1 watching something I dislike. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by evolve or die 

FUCKING SOLAR POWER!!!!

oh wait, I must have missed the giant solar panels THAT WEREN'T ON THE ROOF.

Seriously, if you are going to CAP your response, think before you do it.  

The people obsessing over power and running water must order their cowl components in bulk. Just to avoid suspicion.

Tzu, you have clearly made up your mind about the show at this point and are only watching it so you can instigate internet arguments. Which is fine, knock yourself out, but it doesn't lend any credibility to your argument. You are clearly here to dog the show, no matter how much it improves. But here, let me address your stated as fact opinions:

The writing on the show is not "objectively atrocious".  I will give you that it is spotty. When characters start monologing it does feel dragged down. But sometimes the writing really works, like the scene with Daryl and Andrea and the tree zombie. If that scene didn't work for you on a writing level then I dunno, stick to analyzing Shakespeare or whatever it is you do when you aren't watching zombie television shows.

I can see someone having problems with Callies on the show because her character is hard to like, although I think that she's doing what she's being asked to do. But fine, let's say she's a bad actress. However, Laurie Holden is a terrific actress and is doing a great job with Andrea. I don't see how this can be argued. I totally buy her on the show and love what she is going through from episode to episode. To say she is "dragging the show down" is frankly ludicrous. You just don't want to like her.

As for the editing, I don't really get that either. This episode was edited in such a way to create suspense as to the big Shane reveal. You cite Trick or Treat as some great paragon of storyline editing, which I find laughable. That movie is edited poorly; the crisscrossing storylines and timeline jumping drag the movie to a crashing halt in several places. I am glad you aren't an editor or a writer on The Walking Dead.

I'm actually also of the opinion that the show's been badly edited all season. It's cool if you found the editing of the reveal created suspense but it did the opposite for me. The cold-open made what happened painfully obvious, I knew it the moment Shane got back without Otis.

Laurie Holden is a terrific actress? Personally I think she's one of the weakest, and makes the usually excellent Jeffrey DeMunn look bad. Nice to look at though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamnDirtyApe 

I don't get why Daryl going through the woods at night is dumb? If there's anyone who has proven themselves capable of handling shit, it's Daryl.

Yeah, plus didn't Daryl mention something about how at night, Sophia has a better chance of finding them than in the day because of the flashlight beams. And if they draw a couple of zombies, Daryl knows he can deal with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

I'm actually also of the opinion that the show's been badly edited all season. It's cool if you found the editing of the reveal created suspense but it did the opposite for me. The cold-open made what happened painfully obvious, I knew it the moment Shane got back without Otis.

Yeah, I figured it out as well, but the sheer brutality and cruelty of the act was a surprise and a shock.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

I'm actually also of the opinion that the show's been badly edited all season. It's cool if you found the editing of the reveal created suspense but it did the opposite for me. The cold-open made what happened painfully obvious, I knew it the moment Shane got back without Otis.

See, I didn't get that until we saw it.  When I saw Shane's wounds, I thought he got bit, that maybe a zombie took a chunk out of head or something, and that crazy look was him freaking out that he was infected. 

The thing I love about the Otis reveal, is you could argue both ways.  Shane was a maniac, or Shane did what he had to do to survive and save Carl or maybe a bit of both.  Me and my wife actually had a pretty heated debate, where she was saying she could have never done that, and I said I would have done it.  

It was obvious that something horrible happened to Otis, when Shane started telling everyone a story about it instead of us actually seeing what happened. As for his motivations, I just think it's adorable that they're trying to introduce some of that Breaking Bad moral ambiguity. When I grow up I wanna be just like daddy!

A three to five minute scene in 45 redeems the entire episode and a season and a third worth of terrible dialog for you?  OK.

As to acting, I asked whether or not the actors are the problem or if they are hobbled by bad writing.  I think writing is a bigger problem but make no bones about that fact that Callies is not up to snuff for the show.  Whether that be her talent or she was miscast I haven't concluded yet.  Holden is clearly a better actress(not by much though) and so I give more credit to Andrea being a product of bad writing than to the acting.

The editing on the show has been clunky all along and cuts are too forced to manufacture tension.  Every scene is cut like it is the cliffhanger until next week.  The show is edited together like serial shorts prior to the big picture show, only instead of weekly issues we get trade paperback episodes.

I never said Trick R Treat was a standard to hold up to for editing, my assertion is that crossing different groups story lines together similar to that would be a good way to handle this show.

Appealing to authority aside I believe in this instance it is a valid throughput:

if only because if those words had been published here instead of elsewhere most people in this thread would be sucking his cock about how correct he is.

I haven't made up my mind on the show.  Not sure if you noticed but I had pretty good things(on balance) to say about this episode but when the true nitpicking came around I wasn't dogpiling.  I offered up three non-gotcha discussion alternatives and you immediately circled your wagons.  If anything I would say your mind is more made up than mine and you have trouble letting the flaws of the show come to light.

Considering what we know of the production, I think the editing has been OK. Room for improvement, sure. But considering how crazy things have been behind the scenes I think the editing has been fine. I understand what's going on from scene to scene. You'd think that would be a given but I've seen big budget mega blockbusters that can't get that right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickP 

 

The thing I love about the Otis reveal, is you could argue both ways.  Shane was a maniac, or Shane did what he had to do to survive and save Carl or maybe a bit of both.  Me and my wife actually had a pretty heated debate, where she was saying she could have never done that, and I said I would have done it.  

 I think Shane's only motivation for that move was self-preservation.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamnDirtyApe 

 

 I think Shane's only motivation for that move was self-preservation.
 

 

That only makes sense if it was clear that Shane was having trouble keeping up with Otis, and that Shane trusted Otis would get back regardless of if he did or not.  I don't think either of those things was made clear, and the only reason Shane was there in the first place was for the kid.  If Shane was only acting out of selfish self-preservation, it not only robs the show of its one complex character, but it sort of contradicts other things he's done for the group.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamnDirtyApe 

 

 I think Shane's only motivation for that move was self-preservation.
 

 

Obviously part of it, no one wants to die that way, but I think he loves Lori and Carl. Letting Otis take the fall into the zombies was the only way Shane could save himself and get the supplies back to Herschel in time.   Besides Daryl, at this point I think Shane is the only one who can do what needs to be done.  

Oh, and this might be a Spoiler, but I was listening to an interview,and I guess the end of the Season 2 Part 1, is going to be 

for those who have read the comic, or know about it.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamnDirtyApe 

 I think Shane's only motivation for that move was self-preservation.
 

I feel like its the exact opposite.  Shane, at this point, doesn't much strike me as someone who cares whether he lives or dies.  He wants to save Carl and he wants to get back into Lori's good graces, and he's willing to cross a few lines to do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

 

I haven't made up my mind on the show.  Not sure if you noticed but I had pretty good things(on balance) to say about this episode but when the true nitpicking came around I wasn't dogpiling.  I offered up three non-gotcha discussion alternatives and you immediately circled your wagons.  If anything I would say your mind is more made up than mine and you have trouble letting the flaws of the show come to light.

This is total, utter bullshit. Every post I make I concede to flaws the show has. You however make sweeping pronouncements as fact and gleefully dog the show at every turn. So you had a few nice things to say about the last episode. Big deal. I must have missed that trying to sift through your nitpicking.

There is clearly a faction here that is really only looking to find fault with this show and you are leading the charge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fuzzy dunlop 

Quote:

 

I feel like its the exact opposite.  Shane, at this point, doesn't much strike me as someone who cares whether he lives or dies.  He wants to save Carl and he wants to get back into Lori's good graces, and he's willing to cross a few lines to do so.

 

Also should consider the fact that Otis was the reason Carl needed those medical supplies in the first place, and this could have been Shane's way of helping Otis make it right.

While I'm not going to defend a lot of choices this show makes, and I definitely don't have a problem with this being a well-stocked house with a generator, I *will* confess that they're a little too cavalier about everything, and I would like to see them go more into at least *suggesting* how these people have survived with their basically normal, pre-zombie lifestyle.

In shows like this there's always a contingent of viewer that smacks down any talk of showing the logistics. While I realize that the real story is the characters and not the nitty-gritty of how they're getting food and so on, I think people are too knee-jerk in dismissing the mechanics of survival as a source of interesting storytelling. Jack London is a classic writer, and one of his best known stories is simply about trying to get a fire lit. More recently, the first season of Battlestar Galactica was enthralling precisely because they dealt in some depth with their need to find resources to survive--if you recall, an early element of the show was the desperate search for water, which is what started the ball rolling on introducing the character of Zarek and the element of democratic elections. And I personally find those first few episodes to be, in terms of the causality and plotting, some of the best work BSG ever did.

On the flip side, a recurring problem with Lost, especially early on, was their refusal to deal with the basic mechanics of survival, which frequently made the stakes feel lower; remember the criticism that the characters all felt like they were on a camping trip, rather than desperate survivors in a hostile environment? And again, one of the very best episodes of the show, "Walkabout", dealt directly with the idea of needing to kill a boar to replenish their food supply.

If your show is about people trying to survive cut off from civilization, you HAVE to show some of the logistics, or it just doesn't feel like it matters. Ironically, TWD has been not too bad in this area--there are implausibilities and elusions, but there's at least an acknowledgement that they can't just duck out to the corner store. I'd say they've already surpassed Lost in this regard (though admittedly, Lost was a better show all round.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disciple_72 

Also should consider the fact that Otis was the reason Carl needed those medical supplies in the first place, and this could have been Shane's way of helping Otis make it right.

Yep.  Shane's clearly not happy about that decision and I'm sure that's part of how he's rationalizing it.

Also, kudos to Jon Bernthal for really stepping up this season.  I know this series isn't boasting a ton of great performances (if any), but Bernthal is the leader of the pack right now.

I think it might be a bit early for all this nitpicking. Tensions have been high on the show the past couple of episodes, so it makes sense that people wouldn't be questioning their water or electricity supply. Now that Carl's stitched up and the characters have a chance to sit down and chat, I imagine they'll go into everything in more depth. The writers aren't the best, but I seriously doubt they'd overlook such an obvious question as where these guys got their resources.

So, what does everyone think about the character Merle returning?  I haven't heard anything, so this isn't a spoiler.... but I think it's obvious that he will appear again at some point.

Is there really anyway to do it, that won't feel forced?  I think one of the best plot threads of the Sopranos, was not knowing what happened to the Russian.  I still believe Merle's escape and the van missing was a direct nod to that episode.  

They'd need to have something amazing up their sleeves to not make it feel coincidental, but it would be interesting to see how it effects Daryl, seeing as there's 0% chance Merle will reconcile with the group.

The Daryl dynamic will be interesting.  I just have this feeling, that his relationship with Andrea is going to make him cut ties with Merle when they do eventually meet up, and stick with the group.  If T-Dawg is alive when they encounter him, I'm guessing he will be killed by Merle.   I mean, that has to be the only reason he hasn't been killed off yet, right?   

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

Yeah, I figured it out as well, but the sheer brutality and cruelty of the act was a surprise and a shock.

Because I am truly terrible at guessing these sorts of plot twists and turns, it took me by surprise. And the quick, cold cruelty of it indeed was shocking.

Put me down as having no beefs with the show's editing. As Sebastian said, I have no trouble following the action, understanding the geography of scenes, or keeping track of various plotlines. I'm not expecting Oscar-level editing from a basic cable show, and though I haven't generally been wowed by the framing or editing, I certainly haven't found it wanting.

For me, the show's problems boil down to the writing and choice of what they're focusing on. The latter is a more subjective, creative choice. The former isn't. As far as acting....again, I don't expect Oscar-caliber emoting from a basic cable show about, you know, zombies. And I think, given the show's constraints (limited budget, hurried production schedule, beastly hot weather), I'm satisfied with the skills on display.

You do know that people can actually make bread without the aid of a factory, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

You do know that people can actually make bread without the aid of a factory, right?

WITCHCRAFT!!!

Seriously? We're bitching about the bread Rick's eating?

No fair editing your post, Ambler. You just took the show to task because "They apparently have a bread factory".

Also I don't think all pre-existing loaves of bread suddenly vanished with the appearance of the first zombie

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

Seriously? We're bitching about the bread Rick's eating?

Have you not been playing along?  lol

nitpicks so far

-Bread

-power

-hot water

-laundry

-window security

-food

I'm surprised I haven't heard people complaining about Shane being in shape... and where he got that set of clippers from... 

Hell, has anyone questioned why Herschel has a blood transfusion kits at his home?  THE MADNESS.

I was watching The Sopranos last night, and a lot of the nitpicks this show gets, could easily be applied to many acclaimed shows. 

Sorry about the missing post, I'm having problems with this browser as I'm typing from a friend's computer.  I was trying to edit my bread post to introduce the idea that they maybe they were making their own bread or had frozen a previously bought batch, but the browser was giving me problems.

But here's the thing.  Nitpicks are going to happen because of the drawn out nature of serialized TV.  In a movie its less likely to happen because of the short running time and the plot is just skipping along.  But this is a long running show.  If we spend several episodes at a farm and there is no hint as to how its being maintained in a survival show about the breakdown of civilization, things like "what's with the bread?" "hmm, they have power, wonder how" are going to come up because its tied to the nature of the premise.  And if the writers aren't answering these obvious questions (even with a three second shot of a generator), people are going to wonder. 

And it's a dicussion forum about the show so people's inevitable thoughts about this stuff is bound to spill over.  Calling it nitpicking is too harsh I think, it's just a running thought commentary.  I'm sure the writers plan to explain this stuff, as I saw someone mention that Carl's deathbed stuff was too crazy for them to slow down a bit and offer something up.

being that it's a long running show, do you feel that the writers need to address every time something like bread, or power come up?  I'll admit, as much as I really like this show, I do get tired of the monologues and such... so to me, I don't need, nor want them to add exposition of how they have a power generator and also have an electric water heater to answer a question that has already been addressed in an early episode.  Like in TS-19, Jenner explained that the CDC had power due to a backup source. I think now you have to give the show slack and accept anytime something like power or hot water is present, that facility or area must be running on a backup power source.  

calling many of the comments on here nitpicking, isn't a stretch. Many of the "comments" or "out loud thinking" have logical answers if you give it 30 seconds of thought.  But to not do that, then trash the show for your problem, is at the very least, nitpicking.  

We are bringing so much of our own baggage into this show.  I think it's clear, that the word ZOMBIE doesn't exist in the world of the Walking Dead.  So all the half brained ideas of survival we have come up with over the years, aren't present in this world.  And for all the people that judge the characters "dumb" decisions... I'd like to know, based on the rules and setting of the show, what would you do differently?  I hear so much "this is dumb"... "illogical"... "lazy writing" comments thrown out like crazy. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

I think writing is a bigger problem but make no bones about that fact that Callies is not up to snuff for the show.  Whether that be her talent or she was miscast I haven't concluded yet.

I think we all can agree on that one. Her casting is kinda baffling. There's nothing in her performance that indicates why she got the part. She just seems constantly stunned at everything that is said and done, no matter how mundane. Unless they reveal that her character has a severe mental disorder, that's some community theater-level acting on display.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

In shows like this there's always a contingent of viewer that smacks down any talk of showing the logistics. While I realize that the real story is the characters and not the nitty-gritty of how they're getting food and so on, I think people are too knee-jerk in dismissing the mechanics of survival as a source of interesting storytelling. 

 

On the flip side, a recurring problem with Lost, especially early on, was their refusal to deal with the basic mechanics of survival, which frequently made the stakes feel lower; remember the criticism that the characters all felt like they were on a camping trip, rather than desperate survivors in a hostile environment? And again, one of the very best episodes of the show, "Walkabout", dealt directly with the idea of needing to kill a boar to replenish their food supply.

LOST's entire first season took place over the course of one month. Once they had an episode that dealt with finding water (which was the focus of an entire episode), they had already dealt with the major survival challenge. They also had a plot point centered around a fisherman. 

If TWD were planning on sticking around the farm for an extended period, the mechanics of the farm would matter. I don't get any indication that the farm is a long-term plot point, though. Other than, "it can't support another 10 people", there's no reason for us to know or care about detail like how they get bread.

Shows like these don't need to fill in every blank, as only the most dense or obsessive viewers are going to make a serious issue of whether the warp coils can produce the level of power that Kirk needed them to in episode 103. As long as the farm owners aren't still using an active Netflix account, I can use Occam's Razor to deduce where the hot water comes from.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickP 

being that it's a long running show, do you feel that the writers need to address every time something like bread, or power come up?  I'll admit, as much as I really like this show, I do get tired of the monologues and such... so to me, I don't need, nor want them to add exposition of how they have a power generator and also have an electric water heater to answer a question that has already been addressed in an early episode.  Like in TS-19, Jenner explained that the CDC had power due to a backup source. I think now you have to give the show slack and accept anytime something like power or hot water is present, that facility or area must be running on a backup power source.  

I think an occasional one-line reference to it is good enough. It lets the viewers know the writers have thought of it, and there's an explanation....but it also doesn't shift the focus of the show away from the characters. Like it or not - and whether you think it's successful doing so - THE WALKING DEAD isn't a show about all the tricks people can use to hold on to modern technology. It's about the effects of society being gone on people's relationships.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickP 

being that it's a long running show, do you feel that the writers need to address every time something like bread, or power come up?  I'll admit, as much as I really like this show, I do get tired of the monologues and such... so to me, I don't need, nor want them to add exposition of how they have a power generator and also have an electric water heater to answer a question that has already been addressed in an early episode.  Like in TS-19, Jenner explained that the CDC had power due to a backup source. I think now you have to give the show slack and accept anytime something like power or hot water is present, that facility or area must be running on a backup power source.  

 

calling many of the comments on here nitpicking, isn't a stretch. Many of the "comments" or "out loud thinking" have logical answers if you give it 30 seconds of thought.  But to not do that, then trash the show for your problem, is at the very least, nitpicking.  

 

We are bringing so much of our own baggage into this show.  I think it's clear, that the word ZOMBIE doesn't exist in the world of the Walking Dead.  So all the half brained ideas of survival we have come up with over the years, aren't present in this world.  

In a show about survival when most people do not have access to certain things like power and they suddenly come to a house that appears to be unfazed by the ravages of the breakdown of civilization, yes, I would like a momentary blurb about how they're maintaining.  Only because the characters would probably be asking the same question.  The house isn't the CDC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

In a show about survival when most people do not have access to certain things like power and they suddenly come to a house that appears to be unfazed by the ravages of the breakdown of civilization, yes, I would like a momentary blurb about how they're maintaining.  Only because the characters would probably be asking the same question.  The house isn't the CDC.

Yes, you are correct, the house isn't the CDC, but we know from the CDC that their is no power grid and anytime there is power, it's generated by an outside source.  So knowing that, plus it being a farm house, it's not to far of leap to think it would have a generator of some sorts.  I don't want the show to S.P.E.L.L. out every fucking detail.  I'm smart enough to figure it given the explanations we have been given so far.  I mean, people are acting as if the power in the house powers some automated sentry gun that can tell humans from zombies.  Shit.

Also, if you look at WHY they discovered the farm house, it was because Carl was shot, and dying.  Rick and Laurie, the two people at the farm house are worrying about their son.  I think questioning Herschel, the man you need to save your sons life, about what is powering the cute little lamps in the house, is low on their list.  

At this point, I just want the story to keep moving.  I don't need for them to explain every little detail when it doesn't pertain to the plot at hand.  If Rick was running from zombies, and used some electric powered door that shut off the zombies, I'd want an explanation... (much like the TS-19 show, which the electricity was a plot point, and an explanation was given).  The electricity, really, has no baring on this plot whatsoever.  That is why, complaining about it, is a nitpick.

I'll even go out on a limb, and say if they did ask about the power, people would be going "really, they have to talk about the POWER again, we get it, there are power generators... get on with the story already"

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 It's about the effects of society being gone on people's relationships.

 

Sure, but like you said a little blurb about the minutiae of survival isn't going to stretch your budget and there's plenty of time left over for the characters to whine and do stupid things.  People act like a little minutiae is going to kill the pacing (which already sucks).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

In a show about survival when most people do not have access to certain things like power and they suddenly come to a house that appears to be unfazed by the ravages of the breakdown of civilization, yes, I would like a momentary blurb about how they're maintaining.  Only because the characters would probably be asking the same question.  The house isn't the CDC.

!!!

See, it's not just me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickP 

Yes, you are correct, the house isn't the CDC, but we know from the CDC that their is no power grid and anytime there is power, it's generated by an outside source.  So knowing that, plus it being a farm house, it's not to far of leap to think it would have a generator of some sorts.  

This is a good explanation.  I honestly don't remember that line from the finale, maybe because the show is so boring.  

Please don't be condescending about it. It's pretty clear that the mechanics of survival do matter to some people and not to others. I've already made it clear that I don't care that much about the nitty-gritty, but there needs to be SOME level of attention paid, or it's just annoying and lazy. You mention Lost, and yes, there was some nice attention paid to how the castaways were going to survive in the early going...that was actually some of the most interesting stuff the show did, because it tied into how the castaways were going to form their own de facto little society, something that later seasons sadly abandoned. This isn't OCD nitpicking, it's central to the show, because what makes the story unique is the way the heroes are cut off from civilization, and the level of desperation and intensity that adds to the drama. If everything continues on as if they were in someone's backyard, much of the power of the premise is lost.

TWD is, like I say, better than Lost about this stuff, in my humble opinion. But I'm a little on the fence about the farm, I have to admit. They do have the opportunity in future episodes to go a bit into exactly how they survive out here, and I'll probably be fine with it. But I do think they at least need to nod in the direction of, say, having occasional anti-zombie patrols, or how much fuel they have left (I'm guessing the fact that they'll eventually run out might be what leads these characters to join up with the main group. See how that works? Necessity fuels drama.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickP 

Yes, you are correct, the house isn't the CDC, but we know from the CDC that their is no power grid and anytime there is power, it's generated by an outside source.  So knowing that, plus it being a farm house, it's not to far of leap to think it would have a generator of some sorts.  I don't want the show to S.P.E.L.L. out every fucking detail.  I'm smart enough to figure it given the explanations we have been given so far.  I mean, people are acting as if the power in the house powers some automated sentry gun that can tell humans from zombies.  Shit.

 

Also, if you look at WHY they discovered the farm house, it was because Carl was shot, and dying.  Rick and Laurie, the two people at the farm house are worrying about their son.  I think questioning Herschel, the man you need to save your sons life, about what is powering the cute little lamps in the house, is low on their list.  

 

At this point, I just want the story to keep moving.  I don't need for them to explain every little detail when it doesn't pertain to the plot at hand.  If Rick was running from zombies, and used some electric powered door that shut off the zombies, I'd want an explanation... (much like the TS-19 show, which the electricity was a plot point, and an explanation was given).  The electricity, really, has no baring on this plot whatsoever.  That is why, complaining about it, is a nitpick.

 

I'll even go out on a limb, and say if they did ask about the power, people would be going "really, they have to talk about the POWER again, we get it, there are power generators... get on with the story already"

It's a valid question to ask. If they had a generator for power it would most likely make some noise, the noise could attract some un-welcomed attention. The water I can understand. A farm house like that would have its own well.

Seeing Shane buzz off his hair, as we flash back to why he's doing it was a damn good character moment, but I was pulled out of it wondering where the electricity was coming from.  So yes, wondering where they are getting the power is a valid question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoonBaseNick 

It's a valid question to ask. If they had a generator for power it would most likely make some noise, the noise could attract some un-welcomed attention. The water I can understand. A farm house like that would have its own well.

 

Seeing Shane buzz off his hair, as we flash back to why he's doing it was a damn good character moment, but I was pulled out of it wondering where the electricity was coming from.  So yes, wondering where they are getting the power is a valid question.

 

Valid, yes.... urgent... no

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoonBaseNick 

It's a valid question to ask. If they had a generator for power it would most likely make some noise, the noise could attract some un-welcomed attention.

Not if its in the basement.  But gosh darnit, we just don't know.  Maybe the writers can clear this up.

Man, this thread kind of sucks. Nobody here is even discussing the show. It's just everyone discussing the way other people are discussing it.