Never thought I'd like a zombie show but caught an episode, bought the season 1 DVDs, streamed the remaining and now I'm hooked. The show is presently on hiatus until February 12.

Any other ETS fans?

Is this discussion out-of-bounds for the campfire section of ETS?

They camp every night and forage for food (I'm talking about the un-dead foraging). And the still-humans stress community for survival.

The cities fare particularly badly in this zombie world. Imagine being in DC when the politicians are hungry for more than your wallet....

Must confess when the zombie exterminations commence I'm prone to hit the "mute" button and avert my eyes.

I'd be taking my firesteels and Cup O' Noodle soup and hightailing it somewhere remote. Preferably in the company of people less squeamish and better armed.

Can zombies swim? Lots of sailboats would be available around here.

I like the show. But I hate these multi-month hiatuses. Despite a bit too much forced social drama, it's still one of the better shows available. I'll be watching again come February.

I like the show, too. I watched the first season, but can't find the second season online. Where do you get the streaming from? The AMC site doesn't seem to do that.

Not sure how useful the show is for actual survival knowledge. Probably no more useful than the Island. For example, I don't expect to be able to get into the CDC that easily if anything happens, or to have an unexpectedly heartwarming confrontation with nurses/janitors posing as gangsters to protect old patients.

The Walking Dead did make me want to get a crossbow.

I just found it on Netflix, watched the first six episodes - the only 6 episodes on Netflix - and have to admit that I'm in a bit of withdrawal. It's not enough to convince me to get cable again but I like it.

We have watched both seasons and today AMC has had a Walking Dead marathon that is still running. We got home a couple of hours ago and are currently watching the last couple of the second season episodes.Thus far, the second season of The Walking Dead, we found to be plodding along slow as compared to the first. Hopefully the second half of this season will pick up more in February.

That said, both seasons have had some good acting and great camera work at times. I especially enjoy the acting of the character "Daryl"", the crossbow carrying guy.

Amazon.com has The Walking Dead seasons 1 and 2 (first half of the season 2) available for streaming for $1.99 per episode ($2.99 for Hi-def). That's how I watched Season 2.

I bought the Season 1 DVDs for $15 a couple weeks ago. I just now checked and those are now selling for $9.99 So I just now bought two sets to give to friends. Haven't decided which friends, don't know that any are receptive to zombie entertainment. But then again, neither was I.

Ditto on the crossbow.


By the way, the extra features alone on the Season 1 DVDs are worth the $10 -- lots and lots of background "featurettes" - including for each episode. The how-to on making a zombie via makeup is going to make it easier for me to watch those scenes.

Survival knowledge dividend of The Walking Dead:

I'm not seeing one, unless a zombie virus actually does emerge one day. In which case, you gotta pierce the brain....

The 1977 Winnebego seems like a nice piece of zombie survival gear -- especially the rooftop observation deck.

You can also catch the 2nd season in iTunes, IIRC. I've been a long time fan. Even read some of the comics before it was announced it would be a tv show.

For those just coming into the show during this mid season hiatus, there is a live show that airs right after each new episodes called, The Talking Dead. Its a 30 minute show that reviews the new episode and they usually have one of the shows actors, fx guys, producer or writer on. I dig that kind of stuff.

If you can't find any willing friends, give me a holler. I might buy one set off of you, if my son doesn't go out and buy the DVD's first (he's a fan too).

Bought the DVDs. Watch online - Google Walking Dead and you'll get a variety of choices.

Pretty good show, more realistic than not. But then again, I'm a zombie fan anyhow.

the show is much better than the original graphic novel series by kirkman. much!

Now I'm watching Season 2, thanks to the streaming tips I got here. A few things I noticed:

Firearm safety. They do not use ear plugs and eye protection when training with guns. One would think they would be able to find sunglasses and cotton strips to stuff in the ear.

Crossbow. Guy shoots a squirrel, the bolt goes into a tree. Guy walks up and easily pulls the bolt out of the tree, presumably with the arrowhead intact. I haven't shot at trees before, but I gather getting a bolt out is a pain in the neck, and the point can get stuck in there. But, heck, later when the guy impales himself on a bolt in an accidental fall, he pulls the bolt through (point first, with the fletching going through the body).

Farmer's daughter. Hot. Must add some condoms to my kit. Best. Survival. Tip. Ever.

It's been broadcast in the UK, too. It can be good, but often relies on the characters being stupid to drive the plot forward. The final two episodes got better. They at least did some firearms practice.

Foolishnesses include camping in the open with tents, not being diligent about keeping watch, making repeated visits to the pharmacy whenever they need anything instead of taking everyone in one visit.

[quote=Bingley
Farmer's daughter. Hot. Must add some condoms to my kit. Best. Survival. Tip. Ever. [/quote]

Isn't that SOP for productions of this ilk. Actually, ditch the condoms. Survival of the population is the main objective here.

I watched a couple episodes. Way too PC for my tastes.

Since you bring up the question of culture, I think the show is trying to address a certain trend in contemporary American society. The main characters tend to be somewhat conservative in value, and the storyline works in topical themes such as gun ownership, property rights, religion, and certainly race. But the show also shows a certain discomfort with stereotypical shortcomings associated with the conservative movement: racism, close-mindedness, unthinking religiosity. So instead it opts for a multi-ethnic survival group even with interracial couple(s), and for a certain amount of skepticism towards religious fundamentalism if not towards religion. The biggest jerks are the two, urh, rustic brothers. The show certainly made effort to make race seem like not a problem except for the one bigot who made it a problem.

This does make me wonder what zombies represent. Does the show have political undertones? That is, are zombies those people who do not share moderate conservative values? Note that the group had to escape from the city to the country. Does that reflect the blue urban/red country divide in today's political landscape?

Now, don't get me wrong: I don't think The Walking Dead is some deep show. But often cultural forces work themselves into TV shows. It's just that the shows don't give a deep answer to our social problems.

On a separate topic, the end of Season 2 seems to set up two different modes of survival: Rick's survival with honesty and integrity, and Shane's "dog eat dog" survival. Rick risks himself and his group to perform human and humane deeds. He represents altruism, even though his family is most important to him. Shane, on the other hand, is willing to kill an ally so he can get away from the walkers and bring the needed medical equipment back to the group. So Shane is sort of tribal.

In Jonathan Haidt's very interesting book on moral psychology called The Happiness Hypothesis, he suggests that conservatives tend to be oriented more towards the good of the group they belong to (e.g., family, country), while liberals tend to be concerned with the good of all (i.e., beyond their immediate group). So Rick is kind of a compromise: he does value his family and his survival group, but not to Shane's extreme of doing moral wrong to survive. So this, along with the larger themes of the show as discussed above, makes me think that the Walking Dead is speaking to the new brand of conservatism that is evolving as we speak, that turns away from some of the attitudes of the older generation of conservatives.

Interesting analysis, Bingley. I'm pretty attuned to politics but haven't detected any political undertones in the show. Daryl's brother, Merle, certainly was a nasty cliche (perhaps the last KKK member on earth) but he also disappeared after the second episode (which hand did he sever - his right or left?).

Daryl, the surviving hick brother, became (season 2) Mr. Team Player/Hero in his selfless quest to find the missing girl, Sophia. If I had to pick one of that group as a survival partner he'd be the one I'd go with at this point - at least you'd always have squirrel steak to chew on. I would be compelled to introduce him to the marvel of soap.

Prior to this show I'd stayed away from any zombie entertainment because I equated it with horror shows and do not enjoy the horror genre. But in The Walking Dead the zombies are just the central recurring plot device to explore the survival dynamic of a group of disparate individuals. The zombies could be the slow-moving goo of "The Blob" or invading aliens, highway marauders in Jericho (sadly cancelled in 2008) or the unseen, looming threats in a vast wilderness.

Zombies could be metaphorical, as the 1950s spate of alien invader films were at the height of the Cold War and superpowers nuclear arms race. That would be in the eyes of the beholder even if it were not the intent of the producers. That aspect of the zombie phenomenon is thoroughly explored in this article:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/bl...l-be-ready.html

Will be interesting to see if the zombie virus evolves in some way that makes them slightly more intelligent so that they could be cunning and not just primal in their quest to feed on flesh.

http://www.amctv.com/shows/the-walking-dead

One thing I know for sure: when the zombie virus hits, we are high-tailing it out of DC. On a sailboat. And I'd want to have a group of peops to survive with - strength in numbers. I'll need others to do the gruesome zombie executions while I cover my eyes and ears.

Bingley. wow man you really tucked into that comment. very nice.

Regarding the Shane new world mentality versus Ricks old values, this was discussed on the Talking Dead after show. And the consensus is that Rick is moving towards a more 'new world' mentality. Visually he did this by taking off his uniform and wearing normal clothes.

Also with his wife's pregnancy and the conclusion of the Sophia search, he is struggling to see where does the world fit in with his values.

According to gossip I have seen on the show since hiatus, the next half of the season will be more action based. Hershel, farm owner/vet/religious man, has a serious life crisis trying to reconcile his beliefs and the realization he couldn't save his turned family(something I think the show used to highlight Ricks standards vs. Shanes evolving one), and at least of the main characters is killed. Also something the comic has not be afraid of doing and also occurred in Season 1.

It seems to me the show needs the group to leave the farm; too little action might be good for survival but it makes bad TV.

Realistically, I think Rick was right on track trying to fit in with Hershel's community. If he had managed it, the group would've been well positioned to start rebuilding their lives - not simply surviving. However, I have a feeling that morphing into Little House on the Prairie is not the direction the story tellers want to go in .

Shane on the other hand is positioning the group to get back on the road and delve further into a Mad Max lifestyle. It's certainly not how I'd want to live but it should be interesting to watch.

I don't think we can ever expect "good" decisions from the group because truly good decisions would result in less action and less drama. The people making good decisions in this world are sitting around playing cards, working their little gardens and living off their preps in relatively safe locations.

Not to hijack this thread, but that's the best definition of librals and conservatives I've heard.





I'm not entirely sure that bugging in is the best way to deal with the George Romero type zombies. I think it's all dependent on if they "flock" together (Dawn of he dead), in which case you are going to get besieged if you stay put, or you're dealing with individuals (Survival of the dead).



Getting back to the show, I made it up to about the middle of the second season (save the last one) before I gave up. The drama was getting in the way of the plot.

I dunno about that, although I think that it might be a how a liberal could see it.

I think both are ultimately concerned with the good of all, but differ on how best to approach it.

The early episodes with Morgan seemed to indicate bugging in would work; maybe board up a couple windows & generally stay quiet and out of sight. The Vatos also seemed to make it work, though in a much more challenging environment (dense urban vs. suburban). And of course Hershel's clan was doing okay staying put too.

Keeping moving not only means you are constantly foraging for the essentials, running the risk of dehydration and malnutrition / starvation, but you are constantly vulnerable to the zombies because you don't have a permanent location that can be secured and made defensible.

Even with Romero, the majority of the characters in Dawn of the Dead died because they got bored hanging out in the mall and hit the road instead. And Night of the Living Dead would've been an incredibly boring (but relatively body count free) movie if they'd simply turned out all the lights and hid in the basement .

I couldn't agree more; we'd have much more constructive discussions (as a society) if more people believed this.

Let me urge everyone to follow Chaos' admonition. I think there is some value in discussing the show even in terms of preparedness, though it's also fun, too. It would be a shame to get this thread shut down.

I also want to clarify that I did not intend to bring in politics. I was mainly interested in the cultural factors in a survival show like The Walking Dead. So, to me, Shane and Rick represent two sets of different psychological and cultural attitudes, and it's not clear to me which one would be best for survival. If we're in that situation, should we continue to uphold some sense of fairness and ethics, or should we embrace Shane's "new world" code of conduct?

In one of the last episodes, Dale said to Shane something to the effect of: "I'm contemptuous of you, and I can't be like you. My chance of survival probably is going to be worse because of it, but that's OK." This is self-knowledge and ethical decision. Dale knows who he is and where he sets limits for his conduct. I wonder where each one of us will stand when the storm hits. I don't think we'll know unless we've been tested. (I was almost mugged around Christmas. I had no idea I'd be able to react the way I did, and I certainly had no idea that I wouldn't be upset afterwards.) In the mean time, I have the book that Martin Focazio recommended about how communities actually come together in times of crisis. I hope things will be more like that.

To me Daryl is an interesting guy. Other than the fact that he seems to recover from wounds almost as quickly as Wolverine does from X-Men, he struggles against a different form of group thinking: standing by his brother (kin) vs. helping a group of strangers. In one of the last episodes, he had to climb his way back up a slippery slope after getting thrown off the horse and down the slope, getting impaled by arrow, and almost getting eaten by zombies. He hallucinated and saw his brother, who taunted him. At one point, Merle said, "Don't you know kin is the only thing you can count on?" This is probably the most traditional version of the spectrum between the good of the group vs. the good of all.

Yet he takes risks on behalf of the group precisely because he, as a denizen of the country with this sort of kinship value, doesn't fit in with the group. He has nothing to do in camp, and he's more comfortable searching for Sophia. So this is a bit ironic. Of course, he is also motivated by the new-found friendship with Sophia's mother. Wonder where that relationship is going.

So with your merry gang of a dozen or so trying to survive the zombie onslaught, what's your ideal convoy vehicles?

The Walking Dead is most identified with the 70s Winnebego Chieftain. The roof does make a great observation and sniper platform and zombie-free safe zone.

http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_350764-Winnebago-Chieftain-1977.html

But Rick and fam seem to have taken to an old Jeep Cherokee. Shayne's by his lonesome in a Jeep Wrangler - top off. Daryl has been riding an old-style chopper and I recall that in route to the CDC he had it in the back of a pickup truck.

Is there merit in vehicles of the same brand and model year so parts could be swapped out? The Winnebego is afflicted with water hose travails - not a lot of spares laying around for that engine.

I'm inclined toward full-size pickup trucks that can haul motorcycles, fuel and camping gear. Oh, and multi-rifle racks.

And maybe trucks with campers (that can be jacked up and left behind - as I've seen in campgrounds).

Have to become adept at finding fuel - no matter what cars you have.

Brilliant - yes, gotta keep those zombie teeth away.

I do think a boat is the way to go. A boat on a very big lake with enough homes and support facilities around to raid food for awhile.

I'm assuming zombies can't swim.

Most of the stories I've seen have them walking around on the bottom, but not swimming. So stay in deep water.

While Shane would likely come out on top if it was just him & Rick up against a group of zombies (Otis redux), I'm not convinced he can make the decisions needed for long-term survival in that world.

I mean, they are at a safe, secure location that is also self sufficient with abundant water, food, electricity & even medical care and yet Shane is jumping at the bit to leave and head out into the unknown, zombie infested world to an Army base which, given what we've seen of the Army's effectiveness against the initial zombie uprising, may not even be there anymore. It's basically a repeat of the CDC plan and Shane doesn't appear to have any information to suggest this new "plan" would be any more successful.

He may have lost his moral objection to sacrificing the lives of others for his own comfort & survival, but I don't think he's displayed the capability to choose the environment that is most conducive for survival.

Just because you have the ability to fight doesn't mean you should seek out environments that require you to.

Certainly the show is making it look that way. Another point of significant difference: while Shane instigated killing all the zombies trapped in the barn, violating their host's personal feelings and request, when it turned out one of their own, Sophia, was amongst the zombies, Rick was the one who manned up to put her out of her misery. Just a moment ago Rick was obeying the host's request to attempt to capture and imprison the zombie neighbors, in case one day a cure is found.

I think the difference here is moral courage. Shane has the courage to survive, sure, and the willingness to do whatever it takes. But Rick has the will to survive with moral courage. The show seems to suggest you have to have some of that to be a good leader for a group of people. Shane and Rick are very much alike, and they even share a family in a way (would be interesting to see what happens with Lori's baby). But Shane always seems to be in Rick's shadow, partly because he lacks the personal qualities to lead.

Perhaps this goes back to something I've harped on in this forum: community in the time of disaster. It's probably easier to survive with people than by yourself. If you want to be a part of a community, you can't be shooting your partner so the zombies will feast on him while you can make your get away. Group ethics has an importance. (I admit on this forum I see a lot less of this "me and my 9 against the world" mentality, but on some other forums, man, is it Mad Max over there.)

By the way, re: Sophia in the barn: I totally didn't see it coming. I liked that moment of drama, which totally flipped the switch on the executioners.

There is lots of interesting comments on here since my last response.

Bingley-you mentioned when Daryl hallucinated his brother after falling. The actor who plays the brother (Michael Rooker) was a guest on the post show and talked about why/how all that was taking place in Daryls mind and his morph from redneck to hero.

Dagny, there is a great zombie 2 book series called Day By Day Armageddon by J.L. Bourne. Its considered the best series of the genre. The protagonist is a Naval officer (flight) and the book is written like a diary. The author has him on a boat or dock more than once and gives a convincing reason why its not always the best course of action.

Not to give much away, as the tv show is not the same as the comic, but many of you have mentioned the Mad Max on the run mentality verse the defensible position. In the comics, they come across a couple communities like Hershel's farm, that make a large scale defensible position and use it for a time. To keep the story moving the place is usually run by a despot or insane person. I think right now, they are actually at a small town that is cordoned off, like at the end of Will Smiths I am Legend.

I agree with this, but think that there is more to it than that.

It's not just that Shane is holding to a different set of moral standards than Rick, its like he has a completely different agenda as well.

Shane's insistence on killing the zombies in the barn really made no sense and served no purpose other than to drive a wedge between Hershel's clan & the group. Earlier Daryl recognized there was no point killing an immobilized zombie, that it was a waste of resources and effort and frankly I agree with that assessment.

It's like Shane has it set in his head that they should be out on the road, fighting for survival and that path will somehow lead to the ideal ending that he's envisioned (no Rick maybe?). He's willing to risk the group's safety to satisfy his vision of the future.

It can't just be that he wants to get to the Army base; I can't for the life of me believe that he thinks a government run refugee centre (which in all likelihood doesn't even exist) would some how be better than where they are now.

It seems to me that the safety & security of the farm is blocking him from his desires, whatever they may be.

Rick was in a hospital in a coma when the zombie virus emerged and largely played out, it seems, and is just regaining consciousness when the series begins.

In season 1 and season 2, Shayne's far more experienced with surviving in the zombie world. We'll see where Rick's morals are after he has comparable experience with surviving in the post-apocalypse.

Shayne's head-shearing moment of truth/despair:

But for Shayne (and Doctor Hershel, of course), Carl probably would not have survived the gunshot surgery. In the episode where Shayne and Otis (the hunter who accidentally shot Carl) go to the zombie-infested facility to get medical supplies for Carl's surgery, Shayne was certainly being self-interested in disabling Otis to occupy the pursuing zombies. But if I were Rick, Shayne's the one I'd have entrusted to get the supplies back in time for the surgery, too.

Truth be told, given a choice between being the evening hors d'oeuvres for a pack of famished zombies, or making some stranger (who'd just shot my godson) the meal.... well, my altruism would be sorely tested.

I think Shayne's being too hard on himself for the decision he made to sacrifice Otis (the guy who, after all, shot little Carl).

All in all, if I were trying to survive their zombie-infested world, I'd be delighted to join a group that had Shayne, Rick and Daryl in it. And Andrea, too, now that she's a sharpshooter.

The Barn Zombie Slaughter:

Hershel's outrage aside, there were two good reasons to shoot the zombies: 1) put them out of their misery (are zombies miserable?), and; 2) that rickety old barn was not secure like Fort Knox or even Mayberry's jail cells.

Hershel was oddly passive during the shooting. Going to be interesting to see what he does in the next episode on February 12.

I certainly wouldn't want to be on Shayne's team of survivors. He might get you through the initial attacks slightly better than Rick, but long term? I can't think of a worse personality for a group leader. It would be hell with him as leader. Put me down on Rick's team - short term and long term. Integrity means something, even once the zombies have overrun us.

Maybe this is key. He wants to be Rick, and while Rich was in the coma, he was Rick. Now Shane is discovering that he is just a pale imitation. Staying at the farm is what Rick wants, and this sort of stability is no good for Shane because he won't have a shot at getting Lori back. So there is a personal dimension in addition to the differences in, shall we say, survival strategies.



I dunno. Otis has turned out to be a noble character. Sure, he shot Carl by accident -- and the episode makes it clear -- but he risked his life to make good. He wasn't in good shape so he couldn't run (a factor that surfaced twice). When he and Shane were trapped on top of the bleachers, he basically sacrificed himself: he jumped off and ran in one direction so Shane would have a chance at getting out in the other. He hurt his leg because he was so big. He miraculously survived, and met up with Shane (also injured) outside in this mad dash to life. Shane shot him. At this point I couldn't help but think that there was just more for the zombies to eat. Then after Shane made it back, all bloodied, he was given Otis' clothes, with the admonition that it wouldn't fit him. So it seems to me the show is defining Otis almost by his weight: he has noble instincts, but he is dragged down by his size.

Like Dagny, most viewers probably assume that Carl is somehow more important than Otis. Sure, Carl is Rick's son, and we are to sympathize with Rick and thus with his family. But, really, his main achievement thus far is getting shot. In a real survival situation, is it better to lose a responsible adult male who has a good record of hunting, or is it better to risk losing a child and the tons of medication that you might use in trying to save him?

As for the barn, no, it doesn't make practical sense to keep a whole bunch of zombies there and to feed them. But this is the show's way of dramatizing the connection of non-zombie humans to zombies. Are they things or are they people? It's very hard to lock up or kill people if you think of them as people. So it was easy for the group to shoot Hershel's zombies, but not so easy to shoot Sophia.

I can sympathize with Hershel's decision to lock up the zombies, especially his family. During an initial outbreak I think I'd be more likely to lock up a loved one who was acting that way than I would be to bash their skull in if I had the option. Then, once that's done it might be easier emotionally to simply let them be than to go in and finish them off.

That said, that's not really the reason I said that I didn't think Shane's decision to clean out the barn made sense.

First, it went against the landowner's explicit desires; it simply wasn't Shane's decision to make. If you don't agree with your host and can't come to amicable terms, you leave. Shane, on the other hand, proved to Hershel that the group wasn't trustworthy which will likely result in their being forced to leave anyway.

Second, there was no immediate threat. If the zombies had broke out themselves, I'd likely have a different opinion, but the trapped zombies were pretty much just standing around and there was no evidence that the barn wasn't secure enough to hold them. Again, if you did think the risk was too high the appropriate response would be to discuss the issue with the landowner (like Rick did) and, if unsatisfied, either leave or post your own lookout to ensure your group is safe.

Basically, I can't see any potential upside to the "plan" to clean out the barn - it does nothing but damage the relationship between the host & guests.

The only way I can see it not being a completely horrible idea is if the ultimate plan is to simply take over the farm by force.

Indeed, slaughtering someone else's zombies without permission is a bit rude.

Etiquette was probably one of the early casualties of the zombie apocalypse.

While it may be considered a simple breach of etiquette, maintaining and forging relationships is a survival skill that is very much needed in the group's current situation. However, what they did has the very real potential of driving a permanent wedge between Hershel's clan and their group (this is something I have a feeling Shane understands).

This means the group now faces the very real likelihood of having to head back out on the road. In other words, people will likely die as a direct result of Shane's decision. This makes the decision to clear out the barn a poor survival decision in my books.

Of course, from a story perspective, this is good because people were getting bored of the farm. We don't want the group to be safe, we want action and drama. But from a survival perspective boring is okay.

Dagny and Denis are discussing this matter within the show. But I wonder whether this whole stay on the farm reflects the ideas about property rights in today's society. Should the law give the owner a lot of leeway in setting the rules on his property? In the show, Rick makes it clear that he will try to obey Hershel's rules, but Shane and Daryl don't want to do that. Shane wants to do what he thinks is best for his survival chances, and Daryl is just going to do whatever he wants (he takes a horse, against Hershel's wishes, to look for Sophia).

Addendum: This is one aspect of the sort of thing I'm talking about:



Above quote from Oklahoma mom kills home invader: Why the law was on her side.

Secondly, we are also reminded of the conflict about carrying firearms vs. not carrying firearms in public buildings or when visiting private businesses, etc. I don't think there is much to be said here in the context of the show, since everything seems to be reduced to survival.

Bingley,

In The Walking Dead's America (and world), there is no law.

There are no rights.

These survivors of the apocalypse - of which there seem to be very, very few - are fighting nearly every moment of every day simply not to be eaten. The other few moments they are trying to find something to eat.

If we get into a discussion of property rights in our actual real world, this thread will quickly go off the rails into the land of the political.

That would be a discussion in which zzzzzzz is for boring.


As to the whole barn/zombie slaughter thing: Rick/Shayne, et.al. couldn't very well stay on the farm with those predators still shuffling around in the barn (I can barely sleep after just watching the show!) and they can't stay now that they've slaughtered them.

So, yay!! We'll be on the road again come February. Bye, bye Hershel (love that actor, by the way).

Where would you go from Atlanta/Hershel's farm?

It's absurd to stay anywhere near Atlanta or any other significantly populated area. Which means: bye, bye eastern America. Gotta go west.

Someplace very sparsely populated,

Where you could grow food (and raise livestock, if you can find some breeding stock that zombies haven't gotten to yet).

Snowy winters -- it'd be easier to spot zombies approaching in the snow. And surely they'd have a hard time shuffling through the snow. Zombies don't seem capable of picking up their legs to get through deep snow, let alone putting on snowshoes.

Can't do California - population 40,000,000 of which 39,990,000 probably are now zombies. And that's not counting the illegal zombies....

I'm thinking Idaho -- away from Boise. Lightly populated to begin with. I'm fond of potatoes. There are probably a number of super-rich survivalists around Sun Valley who retreated there early in the zombie crisis. They're lonely now and would welcome some company, I think.

While the character discussions here are great there was this earlier question put forth. My response: one of these.

Fuel may be more readily found in the tanks of abandoned big rigs, construction equipment, etc. than gasoline. Plus you could start making biodiesel.

I'm a little surprised that finding weapons seemed difficult. They should be littering the highways as the armed living run out of ammo and become zombie meals. Do persons without ammo become MRE's for zombies? (man-ready-to-eat)

Wonder if .22LR is an effective caliber for zombie dispatching? Could carry lots more rounds and probably easier to find at the local Walmart. Hit men have been using .22's for years.

Could all the food stores, distribution hubs, etc. be out of food a month into the event if the population that's not eating each other is rapidly diminishing?

Anyway, interesting take on the zombie metaphor.

So there will be a place for K Street lobbyists in the zombie apocalypse.

Good to know. ;-)

The fantasy world of The Walking Dead means something to us because it speaks to the issues of the real world. A show about a fantasy world that means absolutely nothing to us will not attract any audience, because we simply will not be able to relate to it in any way. We will be bored by it. Instead, we want to see things from our lives play out in new ways that are not possible in the real world.

Now I respect the forum's stance on avoiding politics, and I think there is a way to talk about the show and its greater cultural significance without actually talking about politics. To do that, we will have to stick to the show as a laboratory space in which the elements familiar to us in the real world can interact, be tested, etc. For example, if we take your observations (no law, no rights) to their logical conclusion, then what the show implies is that notions such as property and individual rights have become for us ethical rather than institutional. Why, even in such a world of no laws, Hershel's wishes still seem to carry power (with people like Rick and Dale) because he is the property owner.

I guess the larger relevance to the tenor of our forum is that even in such a lawless situation, there may still be ethics, as long as there are people, and ethics may be shaped by our prior acquaintance of the law.

Provided it can be fueled, that could indeed be the ultimate ZSV (Zombie Survival Vehicle) - very nice find! Those zombies would be hardly noticeable under that tire tread.

Agree on the weapon scarcity. Makes no sense, especially in the southeastern U.S. And truth be told, early in the zombie emergence, between the gang bangers and NRA members -- the Southeast should have been a Zombie-Free Zone pretty quickly.

Especially if .22 caliber bullets are zombie-killers.

But the law-abiding gun owners may have been stymied because the legislature never got around to making it legal to kill a zombie. By the time a legislator introduced the Zombies Aren't People Act, there was no longer a quorum of un-dead to enact it.

Plus the social stigma that probably lingered against shooting things that used to be people, perhaps could be people again or may simply be misunderstood people with grievances and bad skin.

Food warehouse: You'd think there might be a lot of Vienna sausages and SPAM left. Pretty sure I'd lose my appetite for meat soon after the zombie outbreak.

The show probably has different appeals to different people. I, for one, could do with less gore, but there is obviously an audience for maximum zombie gore.

I relate to survival situations, no matter the impetus.

You're right about personal ethics. How much of that is shaped by the legal system in the pre-zombie world and how much is upbringing in family situations that stress morality or personal adherence to, say, the Ten Commandments, would be an interminable debate.

Most people don't commit murder and other heinous violent crimes because that is not in their nature, not because to do so would be illegal.

Though I might have mowed down a couple jaywalkers if that were legal....

The Zombie Scenario takes survival to a whole different level. It's one thing to worry about starving, freezing, dehydration or being shot.

It is quite another to be faced with being eaten alive, and not by mosquitoes.

Except they don't seem to have the necessary skills or background and farming seems like the type of thing you'd need to know a thing or two about to be successful (like discussed here, for example).

Save Daryl, they all appear to be urbanites whose skill set doesn't appear to include agriculture (cops, a pizza delivery boy, a lawyer, housewives, ???). And while Daryl may know about hunting, who knows how much, if anything, he knows about farming.

Seems like the type of group that wouldn't make it through the first winter if they attempted to strike it out on their own and live off the land.

My guess is they will end up falling back on their original plan, and Shane's preference, of trying to make it to the Army base in the hopes the government is still intact and will look after them. Somehow I don't think that will work out for them .


However, this is a group who in their current state can't seem to play nice with others. Unless getting the boot from the farm (if that's what happens) teaches them the importance of building community and respecting the owner of the home they're in, I wouldn't hold high hopes for them successfully integrating with an established community or group.

Does this mean I'm not the only one who blocks the screen or looks away during the icky parts?

You're not alone in that Denis.

I keep my finger on the mute button and close my eyes when I hear the zombie breath.

Heebie-jeebies!

The pizza guy's got a certain skill that he has applied to this agrarian situation! *high five!*

The zombie disease, as portrayed in the show, confuses me. If the internal organs stop functioning, then how can the zombies get the body to move? Also, the body needs fuel to move, and even if the body somehow feeds on itself, the reserve is limited. Won't the zombies eventually die (really die) from the lack of food, the cold, etc.? The barn situation shows zombies need to feed on something beyond brain. Rick and the gang can just stay put on the farm for a couple of weeks at best, & wait for the zombies to die out.

Hey Bingley, Here is a LINK to the Walking Dead wiki on their zombies. Which I am reminded they have not called them zombies yet on the show, they call them Walkers and things like that. It was the same in the comics they weren't called zombies until long after the apocalypse started.

At the start of series 2, Shane wanted to leave the group because he realised his presence was causing pain to Lori. It was a noble thing to want. If Andrea or anyone else was fed up with the group and wanted to follow him, so much the better. He kept the group alive for several months before Rick turned up; he doesn't need Rick.

He stayed around to help search for the missing girl, and then because he was needed to help save Carl, and then Daryl got injured. So again, for noble reasons. Now he's just discovered Lori's having his baby so he's conflicted about that.

When he went with Otis to get medical supplies, and they got trapped, he offered to sacrifice himself for Otis. Otis refused. Otis choice is what determined the outcome. Either both Otis and Shane would die, and Carl afterwards, or Shane and Carl could survive. Disabling Otis was not an easy thing to do, but it was the correct moral choice. There was no outcome in which Otis could survive.

I like Shane. Some people seem to think he's near-sociopathic, but I think he's a good man doing the best he can in difficult circumstances. He's put himself in harms way for the sake of the group many times. Rick would have died in the hospital if Shane hadn't taken the time to secure the door before leaving.

Ditto. If I had to pick one person out of that group to rely on in that Walking Dead world, it would be Shane.

Ruthless, a great shot and good looking.

Second choice is Daryl.

Rick was a fool for going back for that neo-Nazi, Merle (Daryl's brother).

Mostly like the show but it seems the writers are deliberately pushing people's buttons by making some of the characters really dense and useless (Lori and Andrea) or aggrevating (Shane). But very subtley they have made guys like Glenn and Daryl the most interesting.

Have you checked out the discussion board on the AMC website? Some interesting discussions but at the same time you can tell that some people have really taken this show to heart. They also have a bit of a character quiz to see whom you most resemble on the show. Of course it's flawed but it was intersting to note I resembled Rick the most (although a Dale or Glenn wouldn't have insulted me either.)

I've watched the show (entertainment value only) since show 1 and then watched the New Year's eve marathon to pick up on a few extra details. It's only been the last couple of years that I have been watching the "Dead" movies having watched the original show waaayyyy back when.

Sociopath or not - he's a good character to have in the show as a lot of the action plays out around him. I personally think he's a ticking time bomb with his growing propensity for violence. Let's face it, he made have good intensions but the fact that he lined up Rick in his sights, nearly went postal at the CIC, barely restrained himself in his attack on Lori, sacrificed Otis, threatened to kill Dale and then really blew up at the barn scene. He wants to be a good man and a role model for Carl and wants to have a relationship with Lori but he is way too volatile. That will come in handy as he will explosively react with the other characters. He is like a barely restrained and once tamed wolf going back wild. One of these days he and Rick will "have it out" and a season cliffhanger will be born!

I got Rick, too. Or "survival leader," with a picture of Rick.

Dagny and other supporters of Shane: take the test and see if you get Shane:

http://www.amctv.com/shows/the-walking-dead/survival-test

Maybe we just like characters we resemble!

Ha - I was categorized as "Father Figure" (Dale).

Of course, no one can know for sure beforehand what they'd do in an extreme situation.

But if a Walker tried to eat my dog there is no question that I'd turn their brain into puddin'....

i got "Natural Leader".

With Comms, Natural Leader.

I just ordered from Amazon "The Walking Dead: Compendium One"

http://www.amazon.com/Walking-Dead-Compe...4897&sr=8-2

1000 pages - "graphic" (comic) books #1-48


I'm officially insane. It's been a long time since I collected comic books (Archie, back when everything was groovy).

I also got Rick.

a fan of the show as well, and yes i got rick as well

So I'm about 30% through "TWD: Compendium One" (1000 pages, graphic books #1-48).

http://www.amazon.com/Walking-Dead-Compe...4897&sr=8-2


Highly recommend for TWD fans. Among the striking aspects of the comics is that the show producers obviously don't feel wedded to them in regard to characters or plot details. Budgetary pressure surely is one limiting factor (lots of characters in the comics and at least one elaborate, difficult to replicate or location-shoot setting). Some aspects of the comics may be too dark for AMC (I hope so). And I think the ratings appeal of certain actors is going to get them a much longer run on the show than they had in the comics.

I've read a number of complaints by journalist critics and in forum comments that Season 2 (set to pick back up on February 12) has been too slow. But what also is evident is that the comics are leisurely in their pacing, there is considerable exposition and a great deal of focus on the basics of survival in TWD world (food and fuel) and even comfort items like clean clothes.

There is one fundamental assumption in the comics that has potential long-term repercussions, but the TV show may well ignore it.

I got Father Figure. LOL!

Interesting, I got Youthful Sidekick (Glenn).
-Blast

You sly dog, you.

-Blast

Another preview video for the second half of season two - which begins February 12:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1520211/#lb-vi2885591321


Looks action-packed!

The Walking Dead's season two resumes tomorrow night (Sunday Feb 12) at 9:00p on AMC.

A season one marathon commenced tonight and Sunday afternoon AMC will be running all the episodes of the first half of season two.

Don't miss out!

Don't forget the Walking Dead! I'm so excited, it's a great show. Daryl is my favorite character, and as someone else mentioned, I'd definitely want him on my side! I'm worried though, he was doing just fine for himself before he started caring so much about the rest of the group! Once he started contributing to the group, that's when he started getting himself in trouble!

Also, on a semi-related side note, remember the episode where somebody needed antibiotics, and Daryl pulled out a Ziplock bag full of them (apparently for his mia brother's variety of STDs)? There is a website selling a first aid kit with antibiotics included. I wonder if it's entirely legal and safe? Thoughts? The Survival Mom wrote about it here: http://thesurvivalmom.com/2012/01/24/the-medcallassist-kit-medical-supplies-and-advice-all-in-one/

I'm not an attorney, and nothing I say should be construed as legal advice. With that said, there are at least two other companies selling kits with prescription drugs in them. In this case as in the others I'm aware of, a doctor holds a telephone consultation with the customer and prescribes medications based on their history and needs. This, as far as I can tell, fulfills all legal requirements.

I'm not a doctor, and nothing I say should be construed as medical advice. Nothing is entirely safe. If you follow directions it's probably safer to use antibiotics in a wilderness medical emergency than not to. Obviously, if you have access to definitive treatment or even a consultation with a doctor you should take advantage of it.

Some years ago I had need of some high power prescription drugs - I was the most proficient first aider on a group planning a month long caving expedition to China. I talked to my primary care physician and walked out with appropriate meds, mostly broad spectrum antibiotics and pain killers. Remember all those items have expiration dates, so refills are the real issue. You can't just buy the kit and forget about it.

That reminds me. In college some of my friends who went to study abroad in China were regularly prescribed a course of Cipro. I'm not sure whether any of them actually had to take the meds, and I don't know whether things have changed since (please don't ask me how long ago).

Interesting....The antibiotic I was given was cipro, along with plenty of "pluggo" meds. We figured, that at some point, we would all get "Mao's revenge." Never happened. We were in some fairly remote villages, and our cuisine was strictly local. None of us had any bowel disturbances at all. We did not take cipro prophylactically, and we never needed it.

Well, tonight's episode did not disappoint.

Don't mess with the Rickster!

NO SPOILERS PLEASE!

This thread is for discussing the show. Foolproof strategy to avoid spoilers for a television show is not to open up threads on the television show.


For anyone on the east coast who is interested, discussion of tonight's episode is ongoing at this link below:

http://www.zombiehunters.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=58215&start=2880

So glad I didn't get caught up in this one.

How did the man on the roof escape the roof after removing his hand? The only access door was locked to keep the zombies away from him and it was still locked and the chain had to be cut so the hunans could get up there.

There is still no proof that he is still alive.

Perhaps he lived long enough to fall off the roof and become Walker Chow.

I keep hoping they'll find a way to bring him back (and not just his brother imagining he's back this time). I really liked the character. Michael Rooker really pulled that guy off and made it completely believable.

Ah! You forget the flaming can of sterno he used to cauterize his wound. And the bloody rags. Does'nt Sterno only burn an hour or two? As a writer i tend to notice little things. I have my own zombie serires I write for fun as I no longer publish. It's fun, but a little to technical for the general public. Thanks for responding.

I recall that Rick and Glenn jumped between roofs early on or went over some gangplank or something. They also climbed up a ladder on one (hard to climb down with one hand and a bloody stump....)

Maybe that helicopter Rick saw picked Merle up....

Merle will probably reappear at some point - too good a bad guy with too justified a grudge to just have him disappear forever.

Am looking forward to this Sunday's episode. It gets curiouser and curiouser....

Me too ... it should definitely be interesting. I have a feeling Shane's days are just about up.

Yep, it was clear last week that Shane is borderline psychotic. He's dangerously obsessed with Lori.

That look in Rick's eyes at the end of the episode was fierce!

I'll miss Shane's character and the actor who plays him. Daryl will now move up to #2 on the Tough Guy Totem Pole.

I'm guessing Shane's demise is this Sunday or next. Carl will kill him.

That definitely seems to be the consensus out there. I'm kinda hoping something else transpires to keep things interesting; I think quite a bit of the dramatic effect of will be lost with everyone figuring that's what's going to happen anyway.

An actor has been signed to play The Governor:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/david-mo...as-new-regular/

"David Morrissey (State Of Play) has landed one of the most anticipated roles on AMC’s The Walking Dead. The British actor is set to join the megahit zombie drama as a new series regular in Season 3, playing The Governor, a popular character from Robert Kirkman’s graphic novel"


.

I like the show, especially the more action packed first season. For routine television, it's a good introduction to a crossbow.

Just found Seasaon 2, episodes 7 - 10 for download. LOVE this show!

The pace sure has picked up in the last couple episodes.

So where are you in the story?

I just started the new episodes. LOVE it!

Big night.

Very big.

Next week's is going to be wild.

Wow. That's all I can say.

I am a bit disappointed by the recent episodes. The pace of development is jarringly uneven, and I think this is a plotting problem rather than a deliberate effect. Randall's captivity could have given an opportunity to reflect on the conflicting approaches to survival, but it gave way to action and melodrama instead. I do like Shane's reflection in the window of the building before walkers came crashing through, but more could have made of it.

To be on topic, the main survival thing I learned from the past few episodes is: learn to interrogate people. The Walking Dead, like The Island, subscribes to the "hit them until they talk" school of thought. As one FBI agent says, if that's what you do, it's hard to trust the information they give you (they may just be making up what you want to hear to stop the torture), but people do it because it's easier to hit someone than to outsmart someone. I guess I'll put it up there with learning to ride a llama in case I find myself retreating to the Andes after a nuclear holocaust.

Spoilers below:

So what's the deal? Some people are already infected while living, but they do not exhibit symptoms until they are killed by something else?

Glen needs to get it on with Maggie more often. She's your woman, so be her man! It's gotten to the point where I'm wondering whether the producers or the audience might be uncomfortable seeing regular gestures of intimacy in an interracial romance.

Poor Dale. I didn't think they'd get rid of him since he's one of the better developed characters, and he has a certain tension/relationship with two other characters.

Guess they'll get a chance to put all those guns to use, hunh?

Yeah, the natural conclusion is that everyone is already infected or that the cause is airborne and attacks at the moment of death. Doesn't bode well for a long term capacity of the "survivors"!
With respect to their guns -- they don't have enough ammo to combat that horde. There had to be 2-300 walkers looking for their next meal. I see more living becoming dead... perhaps even Maggie.

Many fans hypothesize that the fact that everyone is already infected with the virus is what the CDC doctor whispered into Rick's ear at the end of that episode. That's got to be about 5 or 6 billion zombies roaming Earth....

Glenn/Maggie - Season Two had two different Executive Producers and only thirteen episodes to juggle a rather large cast of characters. I think those facts had more to do with diminished screen time for certain characters. Also, Glenn's character made it clear that he has intimacy issues -- Maggie having freaked him out when she said she loves him. And with the zombies residing in the barn until recently, daddy Hershel in the house and hungry zombies in the woods, there haven't been a lot of prime rendezvous locations handy. Interracial romance has not been a big deal on television for decades.

Poignant Q&A with Shane actor Jon Bernthal on filming his last episode of TWD

http://insidetv.ew.com/2012/03/11/jon-bernthal-shane-walking-dead-shocker/

Take me inside the filming of that final confrontation and the emotions at play while playing it.

"We shot that scene all night long. And the entire cast came out and spent the entire night out on that field to be there for the last scene, and Jeff DeMunn [who played the recently deceased Dale] actually had been gone. He lives on a farm in upstate New York, and he had flown down and surprised me to be there for my last scene, which just touched me. And like I said, there was a lot of feeling about the last scene. The writers wanted it to be one way, the actors wanted it one way, the producers wanted it to be another way, I think everybody just sort of had their idea of what that scene should be, and it was just Andy and I in the woods walking out together, and Andy and I turned to each other and said, “You know what, man, this is you and me. Let’s do this for you and me.”

And various reviews:

http://entertainment.time.com/2012/03/12/the-walking-dead-watch-better-angels/

The final sequence of “Better Angels” was arguably the most well crafted set piece of this season. With Rick and Shane alone in a foggy field under the light of a full moon (okay, the moon was a little too big), it felt like a horror movie. It was dark, cold and scary. They had it out — the two alpha males who we knew could never coexist — in a sneaky set up where ultimately Rick was the devious one, coaxing Shane with talk of a truce before literally plunging a knife into his heart. Passion strained the bonds of affection between Rick and Shane, and they became enemies despite the better angels of their nature.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/cele...7GF6R_blog.html

Still, it’s a little sad. Shane stood out as perhaps the most compelling conflicted character in season two. It was never clear what Shane might do next, and on a show where everyone has had the same argument at least five times, a dose of unpredictability was welcome.

Shane’s starkly black and white approach to handling life’s major obstacles will be profoundly missed. From now on, we’ll just have to watch “Walking Dead” while always asking ourselves WWSWD — What would Shane Walsh do?


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtrac...-showdown-.html

With Shane gone, the broken group just might be able to find cohesion again; there is no longer an instigator to question Rick and Hershel's more pacifist, humanist leanings. But in the world of "The Walking Dead," rarely do things get better.

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2012/03/1...ngels-tv-recap/

"For provocations, “Better Angels” offers two choices: Lori’s possibly misinterpreted message of thanks to Shane for his just-after-the-apocalypse heroics on her behalf, which he might have heard as “I still love you, Shane.” Or Rick’s unilateral decision-making over the groups’ affairs, notably reversing last episode’s near-consensus in favor of executing the captive Randall.

"... the simpler interpretation could also be correct: Shane is a twisted psychopath who will kill for what he wants. His scheme to kill Rick borrows from both of his past plots. "


-

Yes, I have problems with this, too. In fact, I had to surf ETS while watching the show. ;D If there is no action, then there's gotta be something like gripping psychological drama to keep the viewer's interest. But it seems that the screenwriters were too concerned about setting up the showdown between Shane and Rick (by portraying a series of conflicts leading up to Shane's murderous plan) that their characters stagnated.



Maybe so, but the combination is unusual. When's the last time you saw romance between an Asian male and a non-Asian female portrayed on prime time TV? Interracial romance on TV has been mostly black man/white woman or white man/Asian or Latin woman. Black women and Asian men appear nowhere nearly as frequently. I'm not accusing the show of racism -- far from it! But I wonder whether the show is still trying to figure out how to portray a "non-standard" interracial romance yet, and so gives Glen an intimacy issue. This is just a guess, obviously.

Thanks for all those quotes. Did you go through all those articles yourself? Good work!

I hesitated to post this link. But we're (presumably) all big kids and can make our own decisions.

At this link is a comprehensive, highly detailed spoiler of the entire season finale. I have no idea if this site has been accurate in the past but it does claim to be.

It all sounds plausible to me.

SPOILERS! SPOILERS! Don't read if you want to have any suspense going into next week's season finale.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/the_walking_dead/news/?a=56212

I feel like I've seen the episode a week early.

But I like watching them again so fine by me!

And maybe these "spoilers" are inaccurate....

I hope not.

Bingley,

You generally have well thought responses but I think you're thinking too much by half on this interracial romance issue. There is a well established story line with Glenn & Maggie in the comics and Glens back story in both comic and tv show is that he is very timid and deferential. Their relationship is the longest running of the TWD comic series.

Asian male/white female romances on tv does appear to be rare though I would tangentially point out How I Met Your Mother (though he is Indian), Hawaii 5-0 has Asian/white romances. I think maybe there is not so much because there is not a lot of Asian males on tv in positions that have relationships, rather than a stigma.

For example, look at cinema. I just saw Journey 2 Mysterious Island today and The Rock (Samoan) is married to Kristen Davis from Sex & the city. Then there have been well known movies like: Harold and Kumar (1&2), The Green Hornet, Jackie Chan and Jet Li often have white female romantic leads, Replacement Killers (Chow Yung Fat/Bridget Fonda), Ninja Assassin. Even Brandon Lee before he died had relationships with white females on screen.

I'm not writing so much to be antagonistic. I respect your position, I don't think its entirely accurate (it is somewhat) but I think for a different reason than some sort of subconscious or even poll tested antagonism to that sort of thing.


Written by a guy with a Hawaiian dad and a Dutch mother.

Comms, no need to tiptoe around me. It was just a hypothesis, and I was just thinking aloud. I didn't detect much evidence for my hypothesis. If I did, I would have pointed it out already.

But I can tell you, with a girl like that, in a world like that, I'd get to loving in a hurry.

Agreed. And in real life the actress speaks with an English accent. Born in Pennsylvania, raised in England.

For The Walking Deadheads - comic book outtakes:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Walking-Dead-C...7515&sr=8-1



-

I don't understand all the "I can't get into this show anymore" responses. I for one, think the show is fantastic. The best thing on commercial TV at the moment. I just wish their seasons weren't so short!

it is interesting how cable channels are dispensing seasons and I think, IMO, it stems back to the writers strike in 2008. A lot of shows, network and cable only had half or partial seasons done before that happened and a long freeze was put on new output. Anyone remember 24 was off air for over a year? I think they found that the hiatus didn't kill franchises like they thought.

And in fact it probably helped some on the higher cable channels in that the mid season breaks are mostly occurring during October to January when people don't watch as much tv. So the in the end the ratings remain high per episode even though the fans are pissed.

I get bummed because some of the shows I have come to watch on cable are only being run during the summer during national channel breaks. So instead of being able to watch say, 25 new episodes of Big Bang between September & May, & repeats all year long; I get 10 straight new episodes of Eureka or Sons of Anarchy and then nothing for a year or more.

Before this season of TWD, when Darbont was fired mid way through filming, readers were lead to expect a big difference in tone between what he did during the Sofia arc and the rest of the season. I think that held up mostly true w/ the second half of the season more action packed than the first.

AMC TV is having a season 2 Walking Dead marathon today starting at 11:00 am which leads up to the season finale episode later tonight.

Wow! Fantastic finale.


[ SPOILERS! SPOILERS! ALERT, WILL ROBINSON - SPOILERS BELOW!!! ]


Zombie flambe.


Rick: "I killed my best friend for you!" "This isn't a democracy anymore!" "Maybe you people can do better without me. Go ahead. There's the door. Send me a postcard."

(Beginning of the "Ricktatorship" according to Glenn Mazarra on The Talking Dead)


Carol: "We're not safe with him."

Daryl: "Rick's done alright by me."


Michone. The prison (interesting how close they are to it - won't be needing to gas up the Suburban).

They won't have any trouble packing Season 3's 18 episodes with drama.

And carnage. Season three will probably open with them finding the prison. Episode 2 will have them settling in, doing housekeeping. Lots of icky scenes as they clean out the prison, as I recall from the GN (aka graphic novels/comic books). By episode 3 I'm guessing they'll be venturing out - Rick does love to travel - and bringing trouble home to their new "fortress."

Lori is a big question mark. I expected her to sob at the loss of Shane but the seething rage at Rick didn't make sense. She is inconsistent (or just the writers are).


.

Check out the "Inside the Season Finale" video on the AMC website. The actress who plays Lori makes a salient observation:


http://www.amctv.com/the-walking-dead/vi...-the-dying-fire


"If living is nothing more than a habit, then we are still addicted to it. For now."



.

The actress who is going to play Michone:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/03/the-walking-dead-casts-michonne-role/


.

Loved season 2. A little slow at times, but good writing all and all. Kind of gets right down to the living vs. surviving thing.

My only worry with the closing speech by Rick is it seemed he was almost channeling Shane, right down to the stupid gesticulating/pointing with the loaded handgun. I hope he hasn't lost humanity. An amazing lack of support demonstrated by his wife in that last scene; perhaps the cause of his tirade. I figure, once someone has tried to kill you twice, you're free to proceed with what must be done. But what do I know?!

I just started it yesterday when I was home alone (wife at work on a 30-hr bender).

Finished through Season 1/Episode six ... thank you Netflix, that's as high as it goes ... very entertaining ( a bit gruesome). Only read page 1 here, but agree they're pretty lax on security, leadership, division of labor. Definitely things that would probably be true to life.

Anyone ever read "I Am Legend?" It delved into "how" the zombies work (become animated, eat flesh, etc), but I totally forget. Someone shoot me a PM if you remember.

Edited to reflect my correct episode count.

I don't mind the slow pace. I do mind the continual stupidity. It mostly seems to be examples of what not to do.

I am especially struck by how many of the their problems are caused, or made worse, by lack of communications. If they had walkie-talkies, Shane and Otis could have called for backup, Lori wouldn't have needed to drive into town to fetch Rick and Hershel back, and you could find out where the kids were any time by just calling them up and asking.

If the characters were as astute as most of us are, the series would be less dramatic (and have lower ratings). But I don't know that I'd be so adept at pithing people.

I would not have been waiting around near Atlanta all that time - farm or no farm. I'd have been more likely to head into the sparsely populated southwest corner of North Carolina, in the Blue Ridge Mountains (still not all that far from Atlanta). I've made a few trips there and driven all of the BRP in NC and VA - the NC and southern VA portions are not close to big cities.

There's a fun exercise as we await Season 3. Going back to the pilot episode, what would we do differently? If anyone's game, I'll study Google Map and make my game plan.


Looks like in Season 3 the primary threats will be other groups of people.

Some interesting discussion of Season 3 at this link below:

http://entertainment.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981211742


'The Walking Dead' Season 3 Spoilers: Andrea and Michonne, Rick and Lori, and the Virus

March 23, 2012 12:50 PM EDT

I think this is very realistic - the real doomsday preppers are heads down in their bunkers, waiting out the disease, not running about in a group without real preparations, providing the entertainment for the rest of us. Real survival is probably far less daring and far more boring - reduce mobility to zero, lock the gates and doors, go above ground where zombies can't follow, and wait for rot to take its course. Zombies who have decomposed down to stumps will be far easier to deal with. This show is about what's left, people mostly unprepared but living on the margin of survival - guns and guts, but often not enough tactics and strategy.

Folks who have the wherewithal to have all the preps will suffer a high casualty rate in a scenario such as this - I bet at least 50% won't make it to their vehicle, another 25% will drop during attacks, and the rest who aren't allied with enough force to resist zombie waves or get to effective shelter will fall, until there really aren't too many people with the forethought to put comms in their vehicles. Comms with rechargeable batteries. I seem to recall that the deputy (Carl?) started with a couple HTs taken from the sheriff's office but without spare batteries or the means to recharge. And those fell off the story line, left behind or left without a charge, or simply left off because no one was within range to answer. Not having rechargeable comms seems criminal if you're of a preparedness mindset, but probably all too common in a Georgia rural county that hasn't funded their Sherriff's office (with DHS funds) to ensure recharging during disasters. Disaster response plans almost always are predicated on the cavalry coming from a higher level of government or national organization: most response plans progress from local, regional, state, federal - here there are only rapidly overwhelmed local, state and federal assets - DHS, FEMA, DoD, etc. The cavalry with reliable comms never arrives.

Stupidity and mistakes are common during everyday disasters. In this scenario there is no authority to prop up supply lines, ensure water, provide some form of communications, safe shelter. They are on their own, and mistakes will be made. I suppose in a zombie scenario stupidity and mistakes costs lives, whittles down the group, exposes more danger. Until an infusion of assistance - like the huge looming prison beyond the trees, why wasn't at least the deputy acquainted at least with the location of local lockups (excellent zombie-resistant shelters) so large? He might have been, but he obviously wasn't thinking enough about the real crying needs of his group - water, food, safe shelter. Given the first two, any jail makes a pretty darn good shelter. Also I am a little surprised that in a nation with over 400 million guns, they aren't finding them littering the streets. Besides ammo, keeping weapons clean and operational would be another issue, but that probably falls below the line of TV entertainment.

Although there is someone pretty prepared in this, whoever is hovering around in the civilian helicopter. I haven't followed the series religiously or read the comic book version of Walking Dead, but eventually I know they'll encounter helicopter person.

Good points, Lono.

Shane said in his final episode that only two weeks elapsed between the zombie virus emerging and society collapsing. So this was not a protracted siege in which the population would have consumed everything. In fact, 99% + (it appears) of the population succumbed quickly.

I've read Compendium One of the "graphic novels" (#1-48 of the comics)- it is interesting to see where they and the television series diverge in plot and characters. There are significant differences to this point so even GN readers can't know for sure just how faithful the TV series will be. Hopefully Compendium Two will be out this summer.

Looks like Season 3 will be exploring much more the primary tension of all post-apocalyptic fiction: the conflicts between different groups of people and individuals who react differently to the void of civilized law and order.

I'm hoping the series won't be as dark as the GN got.

ADMIN NOTE: Nato7 - I moved your post & the replies here into the Walking Dead thread. Generally we keep ETS fairly zombie free but we allow a few to come to the campfire on occassion. I just want to keep them all in one place so we can keep them under control.

-Nighthiker
-----------


Although I'm not much of a fan of zombie films - one question I have is the longevity of a zombie. Film and television portray them as being as resilient as the cockroach.

Mdinana/Paramedicpete please free to correct me on the following:

Depending upon ambient temperature/humidity the human body begins decomposition within about an hour after death. The bacteria in GI tract start to consume the connected tissue while parasites (i.e. insects, bacteria, mold, vermin, and carnivores) commence from the outside.

So, assuming a normal rate of decomposition the zombie would not last much beyond a few months.

If viable, I think it is safe to say that most members on this forum could outlast them.

Yes/no?

LOL-

K, arguing from the side of my mouth.
Zombies are which
A) Magic- in which case medicine is moot
b) ITS A CONSPIRACY MAN! in which case they are genetically engineered- they are not "DEAD" dead, So are not really corpses.
c) caused by a virus- so KINDA dead, but not really- its just not a Human driving the body- who knows if they can ROT, the virus that drives them might drive out other bacteria/rotting mechanisms.
d) radioactive- in which case, the radioactivity is what kills the rotting bacteria.

At any rate- IF there are zombies, I am less concerned with how long it takes them to rot.
First you gotta avoid the 5 billion shambling corpses.

Then you worry about how long they are going to last.

Then you gotta deal with the loss of INFRASTRUCTURE that was eaten/destroyed/run by former corpses.

That's one thing that's bothers me about the George Romero type walking dead zombies. The energy to power the body has to come from somewhere. Famine victims' bodies break down their own muscle and tissue to provide the fuel needed to keep going. Even allowing for the occasional slow pedestrian, I don't think that a zombie can self sustain for more then a few months before it utilizes it's muscle tissue into immobility (de-animation by metablism). Shorten this time if the zombie isn;t the only thing feeding off its body (decomposition).

The raging human Zombieland type Z's are a whole different story.

I'm still of the opinion that the best survival strategy would be bugging in & hiding.

I get why Rick would hit the road to try & find his family, but beyond that I'd say the group would have had better success putting down roots than they did embracing their nomadic tenancies. The Mad Max styled road trip might make for good drama, but I can't help but think it's a mighty poor survival strategy.

As far as specifics go, I think Rick & family (& whoever wanted) could have been well served by simply turning around and heading home once they were reunited.

More recently, I think they could have easily held the farm and stayed there.

Actually, in the zombie series I write, strictly for fun, I came up with a solution why my zombies last for months and months.

As I understand the timeline, roughly 45 days elapsed between Rick being abandoned at hospital and his waking up. Even if people who were not prepared, had time to locate resources. In particular, we know that when they were camping new the city, Glenn made many solo trips to pick up supplies. So I blame him for not collecting more useful gear.

Whether or not it's realistic, it makes the show less interesting. I want to watch people being smarter than me, having ideas I didn't think of. Stupidity is boring.

In this fictional universe the zombies seem to retain mobility indefinitely. One of my biggest fears would be getting treed by a hoard of them, and still being treed by the same hoard 2 years later. I would try to keep mobile. It's easy to out-pace the zombies. By all means set up base in a farm, but if threatened I'd be quick to abandon it, with the idea of returning later when the zombies have moved on. It seems it'd be straightforward to encourage them to move on; once they start walking they don't stop.

Quite so. It seems with the general population depleted, finding resources should be easy. There should be any number of abandoned farms; they didn't need to stick with the first they found.

Many TWD fans like myself may be excited to know that news broke this week that Netflix has approached CBS about re-booting"Jericho" - the CBS series that ran from 2006-08.

For those not in the know, Jericho was a post-apocalyptic scenario in which two dozen U.S. cities (including Washington, D.C.) are nuked. Jericho is a small town in Kansas that is largely unaffected by radiation but which suffers from EMP knocking out the power grid and communications and other challenges of TEOTWAWKI.

The stories center on the community and it's characters' struggles to survive.

Netflix is currently streaming the existing Jericho episodes (29 total) and if you aren't already a Netflix subscriber you can take advantage of their 30-day free trial period.

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/netflix-may-resurrect-jericho-canceled-cbs-drama/

Netflix in the past year has embarked on a new strategy of creating original content, including reprising some excellent shows that have committed fan bases but were cancelled by the networks. The Walking Dead never would have seen the light of day on TV if its fate had hinged on one of the three networks. Jericho was ahead of its time - turned out the Nielsen rating system had no way of gauging how many viewers were watching Jericho via one of the earliest streaming efforts on CBS's website at the time and so viewership was undercounted. Jericho was also aired head-to-head against Fox's American Idol at its zenith which was not helpful to Jericho's ratings.

So Netflix has seen the potential in Jericho and that is no doubt related to TWD's tremendous success.

To compliment Dagny's recommendation of Jericho, I will suggest a show called Jeremiah found on Hulu. The Walking Dead is fantastic, but in this fantasy apocalyptic scenario (with no zombies), the other humans might turn out to be the most dangerous of all.

Just like to comment that the Walking Dead is going on a finnish tv channel that is owned by Fox Company. Season one, third episode that airs tonight.

Not shure if I like it or not. Somehow it bothers me with all these headshots and bloodsplatter. Am I a sissy or what....

+1 for both shows. Gotta say, I'm a little happy to hear there's a possibility of reprising Jericho. :-)

I also liked Jericho. IIRC they just left the finale hanging with the rival town mere seconds away from a frontal assault against the town of Jericho and the main characters squaring up behind barricades to repel them.

Speaking of what Netflix is doing with original content, they've been busy. Lilyhammer is a not so subtle continuation of Steven Van Zandts character Silvio from the Sopranos. Netflix developed, produced and shot the whole season and released it all online on the same day back February. And they have contracted all the original cast of Arrested Development for a season of filming new episodes. I think 10 are planned.

Marathon plus a primetime live special on TWD. For me, this will be must-see TV:

http://blogs.amctv.com/the-walking-dead/2012/05/the-walking-dead-preview-weekend.php


"AMC announced today The Walking Dead Season 3 Preview Weekend on Sat., Jul. 7 and Sun., Jul. 8 beginning at 11:30AM/10:30c each day. Airing just one week before Comic-Con, the two-day programming event will feature a marathon of all 19 episodes from the series' critically acclaimed first two seasons, culminating with a Talking Dead live primetime special on Sun., Jul. 8 at 9/8c. The one-time-only airing of Talking Dead, hosted by Chris Hardwick (Nerdist), will be followed by a never-before-seen black and white version of The Walking Dead pilot episode at 10/9c. The special version of the series' first episode was created specifically for fans of The Walking Dead, as it holds true to the original black and white comic book, written by Robert Kirkman."

An an AP article today on "Zombie Apocalypse" in the common vernacular along with recent spate of horrendous crimes (cannibalism, self-evisceration....)

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/666439ff37944615994128d9cae1616a/US--Talking-About-Zombies


Anatomy of a trend: In wake of gory incidents, 'zombie apocalypse' talk flourishes online

TAMARA LUSH Associated Press
First Posted: June 03, 2012 - 11:40 am

"When people are unsettled about things beyond their control — be it the loss of a job, the high cost of housing or the depletion of a retirement account — they look to metaphors like the zombie."

.

Thanks Dagney. Looking forward to the black and white episode #1 when it airs.

"looking to metaphors like the zombie"

I suppose it's the sign of the times. A zombie is "US" or our former selves. To see a zombie as our enemy is an apolitical enemy that doesn't point to a particular country or religiion or belief. We are our own worst enemy mutated by some outside force so that we are coming back to harm ourselves.

Back in the '50s, we had all kinds of killer beasts that walked the earth in movies. A good deal of them were created out of simple ignorance but also from the general fears created by atomic weapons. These weapons created Godzilla and a whole host of other deformed and fantastic creatures. The zombie is our present day "beast" borne out of our general fears about everything from the economy, Y2K, politicians, environmental distress, terrorism, wayward comets, et al. What started from a low budget flick in '68, the zombie craze and interest is widespread with even manufactures getting in on the marketing by offering zombie protection kits and even zombie bullets.

While essentially a harmless but widespread interest in zombies, it is nevertheless a very interesting mass psychological development in our society -- don't you think?

I am afraid I find the "Z concept" incredibly lame and dumb. Didn't the zombie concept originate in Haitian voodoo or even earlier roots?

I had zero interest in the zombie genre... until I caught an episode of The Walking Dead.

Roarmeister - it is an interesting phenomena. Cold War/nuke fears spawned some remarkable films in the 1950s-60s, The Day The Earth Stood Still being among my favorites.

I love this tv series. I want to know the survival strategies for zombie apocalypse.

how would you guys kill a zombie? would you be scared of it ?

I'm generally fearful of cannibals, of all sorts. Especially since last week when I started reading about the cases in the news.

Hopefully I would have a bazooka on hand.

If not, there's always the Ritter MK5 in my purse. But if I could get to my Bark River Golok, I could be worth of TWD.

How would I kill a zombie?

Well, zombies are already dead, so the question is moot. The real question would be how to stop a zombie. My answer would be selective shots to the head using small caliber weapons.

Why small caliber - it's cheap, plentiful and there are no next day recoil bruises.

Shoot em in the head, makes them dead dead dead. Rather than just undead.

The remake of Dawn of the Dead (set in the mall), while it was a good movie, I can not watch. My first child was born right around that time and the zombie birth plot line has been etched in my head.

Otherwise I love zombie movies. Last Fall I got a tablet and the Kindle book app and there are hundreds of ebooks for sale there on zom poc from Free to $5. I rarely pay more than $3 for a full sized novel and honestly I love reading them. I've probably read 40 books this year on the zom poc. it can disturb your thoughts occasionally but otherwise great action.

The Dawn of the Dead remake honestly was one of the creepiest Zombie movies ever... and I totally agree with the Zombie Birth scene.

I'm a fan of Dawn of the Dead. I never read the comic books, but it appears they are staying pretty close to the story line from what I have read. I think the show is about to take on more of a surreal quality.. So far, a lot of it has been "believable". I think that's about to start changing and take on more of a Apocolyptic Horror/Mad Max kinda feeling. We will see.

And yes.. You shoot them in the head.. Twice.

Rule #2.

First photo of "The Governor"

http://www.tvguide.com/News/Walking-Dead...mp;profileid=05

Sounds like I'll be averting my eyes from the screen a lot in Season 3. And muting..

Issue #100 of the comic will be released in July so hopefully Compendium 2 will be out not long after.


.

Somehow I didn't imagine you a zombie fan Dagny. While I prefer the gentlemans monster, the vampyre, Ann Rice and the TEILIGHT series has left a sour taste in my mouth concerning vamps, hence why I currently write about zombies in my spare time. I have only seen the first season of WALKING DEAD, but from what I've heard, it's sort of veered off course?

Season 2 on DVD/Bluray sometime in October, so rumor says

FWIW, it's also explain it in the book "I am Legend."

I have no idea if your idea is the same, but it's not the first explanation to be out there.

Are you publishing your stuff, or just doing it for your own gratification?